One Name Conspicuously Missing From "Most Trusted Name" Poll

I heard about this story on TV but when I read about it over here it hit me. This "poll" is a prime prime example of liberal bias in the media. While we all laugh and joke and kid about Jon Stewart being the most respected name in news, the setup and obvious bias and manipulation of the poll is completely overlooked... intentionally so I contend.

The real question is that with names like Joe The Plumber (not a newsman), Racheal Maddow (not a newsgal) and Jon Stewart (does fake comedy news) on the list, how is it that the actual most listened to and most trusted and most respected voice (also most hated) on the news of the day by a huge huge (no contest) margin is somehow conveniently absent from their poll on "Who is the Most Trusted Name In News"?

Why is that do you suppose?

The Obama "Ministry of Information Department" Becomes Official June 24th

Courtesy of Oklahomily blog

Today's Drudge Report screams the headline

ABC TURNS PROGRAMMING OVER TO OBAMA;
NEWS TO BE ANCHORED FROM INSIDE WHITE HOUSE

On the night of June 24, the media and government become one, when ABC turns its programming over to President Obama and White House officials to push government run health care -- a move that has ignited an ethical firestorm!

Highlights on the agenda:

ABC NEWS anchor Charlie Gibson will deliver WORLD NEWS from the Blue Room of the White House.

The network plans a prime-time special -- 'Prescription for America' -- originating from the East Room, exclude opposing voices on the debate.
FULL STORY

New Words of the Day

It's not what you say... it's how you say it, look to the right and step to the left. When Obama said "Change" I didn't know he meant changing the meaning of words to fit his politics.
Okay boys and girls take notes and keep up because words are important.

According to the President Obama and a NY Times memo, from this point on we shall refer to...

Terrorism, Islamic attacks, carbombers, suicide bombers and planes flying into buildings as: "Manmade disasters"

The war on Terror, Jihad, War against radical Islam, etc.:
"Overseas Contingency Operation(s)"

Environment:
"The air we breathe, the water our children drink"

Global Warming:
Amended to "Climate Change", now re-amended to "Our Deteriorating Atmosphere".


I've got a new term.... instead of calling leftwing liberal moonbats... leftwing liberal moonbats, how about we call them Demofascists?
Has a nice ring to it.

Example of Propaganda or Worse?

A conversation with a local blogger and recent news events come together.

1- "White House has a new target" - Bloomberg.

2- Obama White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel has 'non-public' (secret) phone calls every morning to former democrat strategists turned 'journalists' and/or consultants 'working' with at least 2 major news outlets (CNN, ABC).

3-The members of those conversations repeat white house talking points on air, sure... but those networks and others sympathetic to the white house are going beyond the call of duty, they are actively attacking specified Obama opponents with news stories designed to discredit, mock and destroy those enemies personally which of course was picked up by the openly pro-Obama MSNBC and NBC.

Summary: The government using the compliant media to control the message and destroy it's political enemies.

IF that isn't propaganda... then please tell me what it is.

Besides being a "bad idea", sure to backfire that is.

Don't You Get Your Free News for Free?

Denver CO-
So I was listening to a local talk radio program this morning and they were talking about the demise of the Rocky Mountain News and the state of the news media in general.

One of the hosts of the program said that his son who is in his 30's hasn't read a newspaper in years because he gets his news by watching CNN or on the Internet.
The host went on to ask why people never complained about paying for their news via a newspaper for decades but now won't pay for their news online (by subscribing) expecting it to be "free". He asked "If people were willing to pay for a newspaper then why not be willing to pay to get your news online instead of expecting to get it for free?"

First of all, the .50 or dollar for a newspaper pays the delivery charge... barely. So actually the newspapers are "free" already.

Secondly, if I get my news online... it's because I paid my connection fees. If I get it on tv I bought the tv and paid the cable charges. I also pay the electric bill that makes the pretty picture light up. It's not free.

So I got in my truck and turned on the radio to hear some music (but the news and traffic at the top of the hour was on) while driving over to my favorite cafe for some breakfast (where they had 3 tv's all on different cable news channels) then I went by the Tire Center to get some new tread and the Local 9atNoon News was on the tv in the waiting area.
Later I paid my cable bill, went back home and flipped between Fox News, Cspan, Cspan2, MSNBC and CNN.
Boy I miss the Rocky Mountain News... hmmm I forget, is the Denver Post still around?

CNN, "Newsfront Cult Called Obamamania"

Journalism is dead part 74...

From The Canadian Free Press: Judi McCleod has a clear view of whats happened to the news media in the US and isn't afraid to say it.

From Judi's article... How The News Became Propaganda

“Apparently CNN, having abandoned any effort to appear impartial, is now selling T-shirts that commemorate Obama’s newborn presidency,” reader Fred Dardick wrote in a Canada Free Press (CFP) letter to the editor yesterday."

CNN T-shirts include slogans such as “Obama raises hand, lifts a nation” and “Obama: It’s time to remake America”... (along with the CNN logo proudly positioned)

“How is it possible for a major news organization to get away with this?” asks Dardick.

“This is anti-American to the core as far as I am concerned. CNN may as well be considered an extension of the apparently never ending Obama campaign.”

CFP would answer Dardick’s question in this way...
During the presidential election campaign, television networks were joined by members of the print media, who jumped into the tank with Obama paving the way for the reality: “2008 the Year the Mainstream Media Died”.

CNN is not only cashing in on the sales of the T-shirts, it provides tangible proof that “The News is Propaganda”. - end.

Right-on the money Judi!

One might also point out that White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel meets each and every morning with CNN's James Carville (former Clinton advisor/democrat strategist) and Paul Begala (former clinton advisor/democrat strategist) and NBC's George Stephanopoulos (former Clinton press secretary) to plan the day's propaganda which will later be spread far and wide across the fruited plain via the corrupt liberal democrat infested propaganda machine we call... "your local news". -red stater

Obama's War Week One, 153 Killed... Media Silent

Thanks to Scott at Flopping Aces

Where is the outrage and the protests from the anti-war left that elected Obama?
Hypocrites one and all.

MSNBC Retracts False, Fake Palin Story as "Hoax", Claims Media are the Victims

Claiming to be the "victim" of a hoax, MSNBC plays the victim card to save face while retracting the horribly false story that claimed Sarah Palin didn't know the difference between Africa the country and Africa the continent among other things. The "story" (hoax) was reported by all major news organizations including Fox News.

The major news media covered this story as valid without ever checking the facts or validity of the claim or the source in their rabid state of constant attacks on Sarah Palin... and even when it was learned that the story was a hoax... most news media outlets barely mentioned this fact.

"The story was not properly vetted and should not have made air," said Jeremy Gaines, MSNBC network spokesman.

Journalism is dead, ...long live "progressive propaganda".

Journalism Is Dead: In The Tank For Obama

Hat tip to Mr. Mike McCarville

Rasmussen: Voters See Mainstream Media Bias At Peak, Worse Problem Than Big Donations

Fifty-five percent (55%) of U.S. voters say the media coverage of this year’s presidential campaign is more biased than in previous election years, according to a new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey.

Only six percent (6%) say the coverage is less biased, while 36% rate it about the same as in previous election years.

Republicans by more than two-to-one compared to Democrats – 79% to 36% -- see the coverage as more biased.

Over half of Democrats (52%) say the coverage is about the same as in previous elections, but just 16% of Republicans agree.
Fifty-four percent (54%) of unaffiliated voters also say the media coverage is more biased this year.

The Power Of One/Media Bias Example #1million

From Mike McCarville at TMRcom.

John Leo: The Power Of One

Liberal media transforms a single bigot at a Sarah Palin rally into a racist mob.

By John Leo ~ Dana Milbank of The Washington Post often writes with a good deal of attitude, and his Tuesday column was no exception.
In his report on Sarah Palin’s campaign speech in Clearwater, Florida, laced with mocking Palinisms (“darn right,” “betcha”), he wrote that “the self-identified pit bull has been unleashed, if not unhinged.”
The “unhinging,” in Milbank’s assessment, came when Palin charged that Obama still has some explaining to do about his relationship with 1960s Weatherman bomber William Ayers.
Milbank also wrote that Palin blamed Katie Couric for her “less-than-successful” CBS interview.

Other newspapers reported a more light-hearted Palin response to the dismal interview. The Tampa Tribune, for example, reported that she said: “I shoulda told them I was just trying to keep Tina Fey in business.”

But Milbank’s report triggered Democratic rage across the Internet with his charge that “Palin’s routine attacks on the media have begun to spill into ugliness.”
Some in the Clearwater crowd, he wrote, shouted abuse at reporters.
Someone yelled “Kill him,” apparently a reference to Ayers; and one person shouted an epithet at a network sound man (apparently the N-word, though Milbank didn’t say) and told him, “Sit down, boy.”

Two shouting extremists in a crowd of 4,500 are two too many, of course.

The question is whether these outliers offer sufficient evidence for a clearly hostile reporter to demonstrate that Palin’s rallies have gotten ugly.

Florida reporters did not see the event that way. The St. Petersburg Times ran a benign story on the Palin speech.
William March of the Tampa Tribune told me, “They booed Obama and the press, but that just makes it a normal Republican rally.”
March admitted that he was standing further from the speaker’s stand than national press reporters, and therefore heard less, but he maintains that the rally was no hate-fest.

An early web version of Milbank’s column was headlined, “In Fla., Palin Goes for the Rough Stuff as Audience Boos Obama.”
Rough stuff? There’s no evidence that Palin did anything more than challenge Obama on Ayers.

In the short TV clip available at the Huffington Post, the crowd booed in response to Palin’s litany of Obama’s liberal votes in the Senate. This is pretty standard campaign behavior.

Milbank’s lone racist at the rally soon became a group (or a mob) of people shouting racial epithets.
A New York Times editorial Tuesday (“The Politics of Attack”) misquoted Milbank’s Post column, claiming that one person shouted “Kill him” and “others shouted epithets at an African-American member of a TV crew.”

Many blogs followed suit: “Crowd at Palin Rally Hurled Racial Epithets at African American on News Crew,” read the headline at Pensito Review.

This was too much for Bob Somerby, the left-leaning blogger at the Daily Howler.
Calling Milbank “a highly unreliable chronicler,”
Somerby taunted the Times for multiplying racists at the rally: “It’s the power of pluralization!...One example becomes much more powerful when we stick an ‘s’ on the end.

In this case, one epithet-shouter turns into a group.
How many people were shouting those epithets?
The editors let you imagine.”

At the Huffington Post, the “Kill him” shout directed at Ayers was interpreted as an assassination threat against Obama.

Another Huffington piece asked, “Is Palin Trying to Incite Violence Against Obama?”

As the misreporting gathered steam on the Internet, writers became ever angrier.

“The event sounds like the precursor to a lynching,” wrote a Daily Kos blogger.

Another opined: “There is a time to start feeling fear.”

Former New York Times reporter Adam Clymer compared Palin events with George Wallace speeches, though he gracefully conceded that “lots of journalists have worked in situations more menacing than covering Sarah Palin.”

This was a disastrous outing for the Post, the Times, and bloggers determined to view Palin appearances as brownshirt rallies.

If the atmosphere is so hate-filled and racist at these events, why does the evidence come down to one shouter at one rally?

John Leo edits the Manhattan Institute website Minding the Campus.

News Media In The Tank For Obama: Don't Believe It? Read This

Special Report
The American Spectator
In the Tank for President Kerry
By Jeffrey Lord
Published 10/7/2008 12:08:35 AM

It's the narrative, stupid.

The media coverage of any Republican candidate for president by the "mainstream media" of America is specifically designed to help the Democrat -- any Democrat -- defeat the Republican and win the White House. No news there.

But how is it done? Specifically, what kind of stories are run and what message are they really intended to convey? Who writes them? What's the narrative?

While a close look at any presidential campaign in recent years will do, let's pick the last one that featured President George W. Bush and Senator John Kerry (or, as he is known in these parts, Jean-Francois Kerry who by the way served in Vietnam). Let's look at the nerve center of the liberal media, the New York Times. The Times has for decades been the liberal journalistic blacksmith shop where the templates of a presidential campaign have been forged. From its pages the template, like a well-crafted sword, is sent forth in duplicate form to the network news anchors and producers, to the other print outlets in the liberal media arsenal, to be used relentlessly in each and every story. It carves the narrative of what is really happening in the campaign. The narrative is composed of daily messages, like a movie director's storyboards that become the scenes in a movie.

So how did this work in 2004?

Let's begin at the beginning of the fall campaign. Kerry has already been nominated, Bush is about to receive his re-nomination in New York.

September 1, 2004:

Headline: DELEGATES MOCK KERRY'S WOUNDS, ANGERING VETERANS
Reporter: Jim Rutenberg
Message: Bush and the GOP hate military veterans. Veterans, thanks to Democrats, are being informed they have been targeted by the GOP for "insults." One veteran says he is "outraged."

Headline: IN RETREAT, BUSH SAYS U.S. WILL WIN WAR ON TERROR
Reporter: Elisabeth Bumiller
Message: Bush is an idiot. He screwed up in an interview with NBC and gave the impression the U.S. couldn't win the war on terror. Then he "raced back" to his earlier statements in a speech to veterans.

Headline: KERRY NEEDS TO SHARPEN HIS ATTACKS, DEMOCRATS SAY
Reporters: David M. Halbfinger and Jodi Wilgoren
Message: Aimed at Kerry, the message is simple: ya gotta beat Bush's brains out or you will lose. Here's how.

Headline: CHENEY FUNCTIONS AS ICON AS WELL AS LIGHTNING ROD
Reporter: Rick Lyman
Message: Cheney is "perhaps the most controversial running mate since Dan Quayle." Meaning, once he was respected, now he's gone over to the Dark Side. He's so scary that, like Quayle, Cheney is "clearly a liability." The guy is downright scary.


September 2, 2004

Headline: JOBLESS FIGURES COULD EMPHASIZE BUSH'S BIG WEAKNESS
Reporter: Richard Stevenson
Message: The economy is going to hell in a hand basket. The Republican Convention enthusiasm may be dampened. This capitalist stuff is nuts and voters are running from Bush because they know he's an incompetent.

Headline: KERRY TELLS VETERANS BUSH FAILS ON IRAQ AND TERROR
Reporter: David M. Halbfinger
Message: Bush stinks as a Commander in Chief and Kerry, a real war hero, knows what he's doing. Kerry is taking the offensive on the Iraq issue, showing he's stronger than Bush.

Headline: POLICE TACTICS MUTE PROTESTORS AND MESSAGES
Reporter: Michael Slackman and Diane Cardwell
Message: New York City has been turned into a police state by the thug Republicans to hide dissent about Bush from the media and the world.

Headline: FAST, FRISKY AND CAFFEINATED, FOX NEWS LOOKED RIGHT AT HOME ALL WEEK
Reporter: Alessandra Stanley
Message: Fox News is a right-wing hate fest "that envelops loyal viewers in a warm, cozy duvet of rage."


September 3, 2004

Headline: FEEL THE HATE
Columnist: Paul Krugman
Message: Republicans and conservatives, well, you know, hate all things good and true. They are nothing but a group of haters.

Headline: SENATOR WHO CROSSED PARTY LINE IS A POLARIZING FIGURE AFTER SPEECH
Reporter: Carl Hulse
Message: A warning to Democrats who would spurn Kerry for Bush as did Georgia Senator Zell Miller. (Did you see any stories like this in 2008 about former GOP Representative Jim Leach after he spoke at the Democrat's Convention for Obama? Me neither.)

Headline: WITH JAUNDICED EYES AND BARBED TONGUES
Reporter: Jason Zinoman
Message: This is a theater review of two scathing anti-Bush plays. One playwright is quoted as saying, "I feel like everything I did with my life is under attack," comparing the very existence of the Bush administration to the assassination of Martin Luther King. The second play calls Colin Powell a traitor to his race and ridicules the Jewishness of ex-Bush Pentagon deputy secretary Paul Wolfowitz. The point: you can't trust self-hating blacks and shifty Jews who help Bush.


September 6, 2004

Headline: IN TRYING TIME, SCALING DOWN EXPECTATIONS OF JOB GROWTH
Reporter: Eduardo Porter
Message: Once again, under Bush the economy has gone to hell in a handbasket.


September 8, 2004

Headline: PENTAGON RELEASES BUSH'S LONG-SOUGHT MILITARY RECORDS
Reporter: Elisabeth Bumiller
Message: Bush lied about his military service and tried to duck Vietnam service. The story focuses on "Texas for Truth," a Democratic group "questioning" Bush's attendance record while in the guard.


September 9, 2004

Headline: CHENEY SPITS TOADS
Columnist: Maureen Dowd.
Message: The VP is a paranoid nutcase.


September 10, 2004

Headline: KERRY INVOKES BIBLE IN APPEAL FOR BLACK VOTES
Reporter: Jodi Wilgoren
Message: "In a speech to thousands of cheering, swaying members of the National Baptist Convention..." Kerry is "citing scripture and attacking Bush." Kerry has a great connection with minorities and he's religious (but not like Bush) to boot.


September 11, 2004

Headline: CBS DEFENDS ITS REPORT ON BUSH MILITARY RECORD
Reporters: Jim Rutenberg and Kate Zernike
Message: "Dan Rather, the CBS News anchor, moved aggressively -- on the air -- to protect the credibility of the news division." Something is wrong, how can CBS possibly be questioned over what we all know to be true? Go Dan!


September 12, 2004

Headline: KERRY SUGGESTS RIVALS MIGHT SUPRESS BLACK VOTES
Reporter: Jodi Wilgoren
Message: Bush is a racist.


September 30, 2004

Headline: PENTAGON SPENDS WITHOUT BIDS, STUDY SAYS
Reporter: Leslie Wayne
Message: The Bush Pentagon is "a Keystone Kop situation."


October 3, 2004

Headline: ON KERRY'S JOURNEY TO HEALTH, STOPS FOR SHRAPNEL AND CANCER
Reporter: Lawrence K. Altman
Message: Kerry is a real athlete, war hero and cancer survivor. He participates in "strenuous activities like windsurfing," has two pieces of shrapnel "deep" in his left thigh, and has recovered from prostate cancer. What a guy!


October 4, 2004

Headline: AN INVIGORATED KERRY COURTS OHIO, AND SOME SWING VOTERS ARE TAKING A HARDER LOOK
Reporter: David M. Halbfinger
Message: "He's not Clinton, but he's close," says a newly admiring voter and Clinton fan. If "new polls are any indication, swing voters are giving Mr. Kerry a second look after his strong showing in the first presidential debate." Kerry is winning, we tell you, he's winning!!!!!


October 4, 2004

Headline: IN THE SENATE, RAISING A (QUIET) REPUBLICAN VOICE AGAINST THE ADMINISTRATION
Reporter: Sheryl Gay Stolberg
Message: Rhode Island GOP Senator Lincoln Chafee is "stunned" at an agenda of tax cuts, missile defense and saying no to the Kyoto Treaty. More in sorrow than anger, a prep school buddy of Jeb Bush is deeply troubled by the Bush administration. Cheney is an extremist nut.


October 5, 2004

Headline: CAN FEAR WIN UNDECIDED VOTERS? PSYCHOLGISTS SAY MAYBE NOT
Reporter: Benedict Carey
Message: Remember when the GOP used that racist Willie Horton ad? Bush is trying to scare voters again but it won't work.


October 18, 2004

Headline: IMAGINING AMERICA IF GEORGE BUSH CHOSE THE SUPREME COURT
Columnist: Adam Cohen
Message: Gays in prison for having sex in their own home, abortion is a crime, states would be mini-theocracies. My God, they want to make America an evangelical version of Saudi Arabia!


OCTOBER 19, 2004

Headline: POLL SHOWS TIE; CONCERNS CITED ON BOTH RIVALS
Reporter: Adam Nagourney
Message, "As of now, voters have a warmer view of the Democratic Party than the Republican Party..."
Come on team! Pick up your socks! People like us more than the bad guys! We're winning this thing!


October 20, 2004

Headline: POLL SHOWS GAINS FOR KERRY AMONG WOMEN IN THE ELECTORATE
Reporter: Katharine Q. Seelye
Message: "A group that once favored Bush now appears to offer Kerry solid support." Yes! Women to the rescue! What did you expect? There is no such thing as a conservative woman. Women hate Bush!


October 20, 2004

Headline: VATICAN SAYS KERRY STANCE ON ABORTION IS NOT HERESY
Reporter: Pam Belluck
Message: OK you Catholics, listen up: the Pope is really for Kerry, OK????


OCTOBER 21, 2004

Headline: MICHIGAN: KERRY IN THE LEAD ALMOST BY DEFAULT
Reporter: R.W. Apple
Message: This is the beginning of a Kerry sweep, no question. They get it in Michigan.


October 26, 2004

Headline: FOR AL GORE, A RETURN TO 2000 WHERE IT ENDED
Reporter: Jim Dwyer
Message: Al Gore is "the real president" and the bastards stole it from him. Never forget. The poor guy just hasn't gotten over it and we can't blame him.


October 29, 2004

Headline: BUSH CAMPAIGN REPLACES AD THAT HAD DOCTORED IMAGES
Reporter: Jim Rutenberg
Message: The lying SOB's are screwing around with advertising but this outfit called the Daily Kos nailed 'em! Go Daily Kos!


November 1, 2004

Headline: A LOOSER, MORE JOVIAL KERRY PREPARES FOR VOTERS' CHOICE
Reporter: Jodi Wilgoren
Message: The Man is in great shape because he's gonna win!!! He even gets in the shower before his wake-up call! What a guy! What a great president he will be!


November 3, 2004

Headline: AFTER CONCESSION BY KERRY, PRESIDENT CITES 'A DUTY TO SERVE ALL AMERICANS'
Reporter: Adam Nagourney
Message: We lost???!!!! You've got be kidding!!!! How could this happen?


November 4, 2004

Headline: A BLUE CITY (DISCONSOLATE, EVEN) BEWILDERED BY A RED AMERICA
Reporter: Joseph Berger
Message. A voter in Manhattan says, "New York is an island off the coast of Europe." "Some New Yorkers said...they didn't even know any people who voted for President Bush." What is happening to our world! This makes no sense!

Ahhhhh. But fear not. The Times was already thinking ahead when it ran this story on October 27:

Headline: WHERE TO CATCH A RISING POLITICAL STAR? TRY ILLINOIS
Reporter: Monica Davey
Message: There's this hot black guy named Barack Obama and he's raised all this money that he's giving out to U.S. Senate candidates all over America. But why? Why would a mere Illinois State Senator be doing this in the middle of his own campaign to get elected to the U.S. Senate? He says he can't wait to get to Washington and work with Hillary Clinton!


THERE'S MORE, much more. But you get the picture of the 2004 candidates per the New York Times. George Bush is a racist thug and a coward with a paranoid nut for a running mate. John Kerry is a jovial athletic war hero who loves demanding sports and would make a superb Commander in Chief. The economy has fallen apart, the Pentagon is spending like a drunken sailor, but all of this is ignored by Fox News which is a right-wing "duvet of rage." Not to worry, though, because Dan Rather is aggressively getting The Truth out in spite of these idiots. The polls are great, blacks are swaying with delight in the pews, and women are streaming into Kerry's camp because they are terrified of the idiots Bush might put on the Supreme Court. The Pope actually loves Kerry and is trying quietly to get the message out to Catholics with the help of the Times.

And when the results are actually in? The news of a Bush victory is stunning because the voters the Times spoke with "didn't know anybody who voted for Bush."

So. This is the game. This is how it's done day in and day out. Story by story by story. From the Times to the networks. Listen to this quote from Washington Post reporter Howard Kurtz on his CNN show Reliable Sources the other day. Kurtz was showing clips of Governor Sarah Palin speaking of her position in opposition to the Bridge to Nowhere. Implying she was lying, and that various mainstream media outlets had called her out on this issue to no effect, Kurtz lamented: "It seems like we can't influence this campaign."

Notice he didn't say they weren't trying. Again.

Vote Obama-Biden or Elect McCain-Palin

Journalism is dead.
It's no secret that the news media is controlled by democrats. Major studies and polls have more than demonstrated that fact. No link required, use your brain.
In fact they don't even really bother to try and hide it anymore.
So, if you want to pick up the newspaper or turn on the news everyday for the next 4 years and hear about how great things are under President Obama and how no matter what goes wrong... it was Bush's fault, then vote for Obama-Biden.
If you want to increase taxes on those already paying over 95% of the taxes vote for Obama-Biden.
If you want to increase YOUR taxes vote Obama Biden.
If you think America is the problem and not the solution... vote Obama Biden.
If you want our military downgraded, degraded and put on the back burner... vote Obama-Biden. If you want more government in your life, more spending (over $1 trillion new programs proposed) out of your pocket... then vote Obama-biden.


If you want to piss-off the Democrat run news media, Hollywood and extreme leftists who are trying to socialize our country and in the process protect our country from terrorists (instead of meeting with them) restore our economy (by lowering taxes not raising them) stand up to our enemies and protect our friends,... then elect McCain-Palin. If you want to eliminate corruption in Washington you don't bring in a "community organizer" from Chicago to do it. You bring in a corruption fighting pit-bull from Alaska and a tough old maverick from Arizona. If you don't let the news media decide who you vote for, then elect McCain-Palin.
If you believe it is time for a woman to be Vice President... and save this country from socialism. then elect McCain-Palin.
If you really-truly want to vote for change, then elect McCain- Palin.
Besides, without Sarah Palin, Tina Fey will have to go back to being a cute SNL second tier bit player.

Media In The Tank For Obama Hook Line and Sinker

Engram at the BackTalk Blog hits another one out of the park...

As you can probably tell, I (Engram) agree with Tony Blankley, who says:

The mainstream media have gone over the line and are now straight-out propagandists for the Obama campaign.

While they have been liberal and blinkered in their worldview for decades, in 2007-08, for the first time, the major media consciously are covering for one candidate for president and consciously are knifing the other. This is no longer journalism; it is simply propaganda."

Engram writes...

"The media is in the tank for Barack Obama, and that's the simple explanation for why mainstream media reporters are maniacally investigating the flowers that Sarah Palin received during her years as mayor of Wasilla while studiously ignoring what Barack Obama did during his years as a community organizer and as chairman of the board of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge.
It's a very strange feeling to watch this play out before one's very eyes."

Demand Separation of State and News

You may have already glanced at the post below this one and thought... 'liberal bias in the news', ...so what... what difference does it really make?
I've tiptoed around this in other posts, but I'm gonna come right out and say what others are either afraid to say or haven't thought through... or I've missed.

The news media isn't just biased to the left... it has become nothing more than a Socialist Government propaganda tool combined with some pretty pictures, clever ads and lots of sports candy to keep us coming back for more. (Americans LOVE sports !!!)

If you're thinking "Bush controls the media", quite the contrary, if he did... the reports from Iraq would have a much different look to them as well as everything else in the news I assure you.
No, our Democrat/Socialist controlled government controls the Socialist/Democrat controlled media. The Government IS the media right now and the media IS the government (the majority Democrat part only).

We hear a lot these days about the separation of state and church... well I'm calling for the IMMEDIATE Separation of STATE and NEWS.

How can I say such a thing?

Consider what's been 'going down' between the "new media" and the "old media" and the Democrat majority controlled government.
You have leftist blogs like moveon.org and the daily kos etc. feeding phoney news stories to the leftist print and main stream news media which presents the stories as fact to the public (without retraction when stories have been refuted) combined with a leftist leaning slant to the entire news report in the first place. Real news with a slant combined with outright lies and propaganda. For the purpose of this discussion the terms Leftist, Socialist, Democrat and Government are interchangeable.

Leftist blog-o-sphere + Leftist media =Leftist propaganda.

The next component to the equation is leftist control of the government. It's no secret that the Democrat party agenda and the Socialist Democratic agenda and the Socialist agenda and the American Communist party agenda are all pretty much xerox's of each other with minor marketing and cosmetic differences. Let's just say Democrats LEAN left. Way left. Socialist left at the least. Democrats are by and large... socialist and one look at their plans for healthcare, the economy, taxes etc. will confirm this in just a few seconds.

Leftist Democrat control of government + Leftist Democrat control of media = Leftist government controlled media.

"No I'm not,...YOU are..." And all the while, Democrats spend a good deal of marketing energy making sure they go on the leftist blogs who feed it to the leftist media where they all accuse the rest of the media of being in George Bush's pocket. Media Matters was created and is serving just this purpose as we speak, it filters out the rightwing lies from the truth of the left. This doesn't happen by accident but by design. It's called "covering your tracks".
If you ever watched pro wrestling for entertainment as a kid... you always saw the bad guy claiming he was the victim as he 'cheated' behind the ref's back... great theater, but the audience could see what was going on that the ref couldn't... in the case of the analogy with our media we never get to see what is going on ...because the ref, the cameraman, the producer and the network are all pretty much in the tank for the "socialist guy/gal". (wrasslin' fan? soonerthought used the phrase - "worked the ref" in his recent Globalgore post to make the lame case against liberal bias existence with a link several years old thus avoiding any new evidence to the contrary-lol)

Yes, I realize that our media is not forced by the government in this case but is a willing compliant component in the blatant movement to take our country from us, even WHILE WE *ARE AT WAR with a very real and dangerous enemy on a different front which this same media refuses to report on properly. (shocking! ...film at...never o'clock)
From wiki on State Controlled Media...

"The state controlled media in Belarus deny that there is any bias or censoring of freedom of expression in Belarus. They point to the Belarusian people's overwhelming re-election of Lukashenko on September 9, 2001 claiming that this shows that the anti-democracy sentiment in Belarus is genuine and that the Belarusian people and media do have the right to free speech - they simply do not want to criticize their government because they believe it to be running the country well."

*See "Will 12th Imam, Please stand up" below if you haven't heard about the war yet. I can however, understand why you may have not heard anything about the war (except that war is bad).

Now, I'm not big on yelling the sky is falling and stuff like that.... but we (as Americans) need to put down the remote control for about second, forget about drag racing and football and baseball and how much you hate your job and all the other things that are distracting us from putting a stop to this immediately.

Combine all of the above with the fact that the left and the leftist controlled media attempt to SUPPRESS all forms of opposition like Fox News, Rush Limbaugh and any newspaper that dares report negative stories on Democrats are discredited, attacked and as in the case of the Daily Oklahoman Newspaper... local leftist blogger Okie Funk author and college professor will not allow college students to even use the largest paper in the state as a credible source as I have documented earlier.
Investigations need to be launched and conducted to find out just how deep this problem goes, root it out and clean up the news media (Ministry of Information) and call for an Immediate Separation of News and State.

One suggestion I have made in the past is to simply require every political reporter to provide his/her leanings statement along with each story.
Example:
Name: David Podvin and Jamil Hussein
Occupation: Phoney Journalist, blogger , often quoted ...never found.
Political leaning: Democrat, Bush hater.

Britt Hume
News, opinion.
Conservative leaning journalist.

Chris Mathews, Keith Olberman, Dan Rather (oops "retired" lol), ABC, NBC, CBS, MSNBC, CNN, NY Times, AP, and 99% of the news media
Occupation: Getting Democrats elected to office under the guise of journalism.
Political leaning: ...lol..., what, are you kidding me?

Rush Limbaugh
Rush doesn't give us the news (he disassembles it and looks at it) and is already UP FRONT with everyone on where he is coming from. He is a conservative... and in fact is probably "THE" conservative.. and proudly (but humbly) while accurate 98% of the time, proclaims it so.
The rest of the media could learn a valuable lesson from Rush on this. But then they'd have to give up on their dirty little secret.

Then they might miss out on their planned tri-fecta in 2008... that being the Senate, the House and the White House.
Democratic Socialist rule, are you really ready for that folks?

Comparing Rush Limbaugh To Daily Kos?

A lefty friend commented on one of my posts below that there really isn't any difference between liberal bloggers like moveon.org, daily kos, Okie Funk, Sooner Thought...etc. copying each other and what conservative talk radio and conservative bloggers do.

He agrees that many liberal bloggers do re-post what they read on each others blogs as fact but goes on to claim that conservative bloggers merely re-post what they hear on talk radio ...as fact.
Sounds reasonable....and fair, as long as you don't actually think about it or analyze it, that is.

Here is the chain of "command" and difference in the two... liberals at moveon.org and daily kos posts a "story", the story gets picked up by other liberal bloggers and spread in CLOSED forums, liberal groups like mediamatters (founded by Hillary Clinton and other Democrats to combat talk radio) claiming to be "unbiased" take these stories and validate them, (name an example of media matters disputing daily kos or moveon.org) where they then go to the main stream media like the NY Times and are re-printed again in a CLOSED forum. The AP is another group of liberally biased "journalists" who write and post stories (some times aquired from liberal bloggers like moveon or kos) on the AP wire service to be copied and re-printed by newspapers across the land... as fact, again in a CLOSED forum.
Examples: Dan Rather, Jason Blair, David Podvin and Jamil Hussein for starters.

There is virtually zero accountability on the above chain of command reporting... (without talk radio)

Conservative talk radio (like Rush Limbaugh), take previously reported news stories and OPENLY debate, debunk, refute and sometimes even confirms them... in an OPEN forum. Anyone can call in and call BS on them if they have the goods (or even just think they do). Rush AND Sean love to let liberals come on their show and talk away... it usually proves their point.
Rush rarely uses rightwing bloggers as his source for his opinions (and qualifies it when he does), and very rarely do conservative bloggers use Rush as the source for their opinions or posts.
The mainstream media rarely (if ever) takes a story from talk radio and reports it as fact.... but the opposite is true... the mainstream media DID take a story from liberal bloggers about conservative radio -RUSH (phoney soldiers) and reported it as fact, when it was a lie.

By the time Rush or Sean discuss their opinion on a story, most conservative bloggers have already formed an opinion, posted about it on their blog and when it is discussed on talk radio... say "yup, Rush agrees with me" (or not).
Example: Today (Monday) Rush Limbaugh at 12:45 pm Central referred to a Washington Post editorial which I posted about on Saturday and Engram posted about last Friday. I'm pretty sure Rush didn't get the story from here (or Back Talk) and spread it, no ...we came to the same conclusion without ever knowing (or caring) what the other would say. So, if anything, Rush says what bloggers say (since we said it first) and not the reverse as my friend claimed.

comparing moveon.org (or daily kos) to Rush Limbaugh is like comparing Tokyo Rose to the Armed Forces Network... however it would be quite easy to draw a comparison between Tokyo Rose and moveon.org, daily kos and many in the media today.

Extremist liberals (so defined by moderate liberals) claim anyone who disagrees with them are "extreme right wingers"... (according to Okie Funk, Feinstein is a rightwinger) when in fact, by any real standard conservative talk show hosts are moderate conservatives and not extreme in any fashion.
Examples: Do you hear conservative talk radio hosts claiming that we need to force people to become Christians by law? No.
(Liberals want God and Christianity removed with laws)
Do you hear conservatives saying we need to eradicate all liberal bloggers and liberal newspapers with laws? No.
(Liberals want talk radio shut down with laws)
Do you hear calls to take out our rightwing guns and retake the country from Democrats by force? (Democrats took out their best lies to "Take Back America" by force) No.
Calls to lock-up Bill Clinton, put alGore in a nut-house, ban Hollywood from making political statements? NO, of course not... (but liberals want Bush and Cheney locked up, Rush put in a nuthouse and to ban all conservative opinion as "hate speech").

These would all be examples of rightwing "extremism"... instead conservatives tolerate and even debate over fake Documentaries, fake news stories about phoney soldiers, fake news stories by phoney journalists and phoney liberal bloggers calling a US General a traitor during a time of war (for reporting validated US successes in that war) and phoney claims that alGore won in 2000... Kerry in 04 and phoney claims that Bush is a liar on every subject. Extreme? Yup.

My friend has gotten it wrong. There is no comparison whatsoever between liberal bloggers and conservative talk radio... and in fact I would argue that they are opposites in most aspects.

A while back this same friend accused Rush of making unsubstantiated attacks on liberals in the same way moveon.org attacked Rush on the "phoney soldiers" hoax... without giving any examples of such. I asked him to provide just one example of an unsubstantiated attack by Rush on anyone...ever. I'm still waiting for that one example... which should be easy to find if what he claimed were true. In contrast, I can provide dozens of unsubstantiated attacks on Bush and conservatives by liberal bloggers.

I do understand however why most liberals and Democrats would want conservative talk radio to "go away" or simply be discredited, then they would have no one to answer to at all... wouldn't THAT be nice?
Just like in the good 'ol days when there were only 3 major networks (all liberal) and no talk radio (or internet) to dispute them.
-red

UPDATE: 10/16/07- My Lefty friend informed me that I took his words out of context... here is what he said.
"There is a lot of commonality in the posts on liberal and conservative blogs. Often the posts on right wing blogs mirror what was on talk radio that day and left blogs often mimic the Daily Kos, AmericaBlog, etc."