Archive for February 2011
Yesterday, four innocent Americans were killed by Somali pirates.
You may recall a similar story from not too long ago involving the Russians. “Similar”, of course, only by virtue of the fact that Somali pirates took a Russian ship; the rest of the story, however, is quite different: In response, Russian commandos stormed their commandeered ship in the dead of night, liberated their countrymen (and their ship), arrested the pirates, handcuffed them to their (the pirates’) boat’s rigging—now here’s where it gets really good—lit the boat on fire with the pirates chained to it…filmed it…and posted it on YouTube for all the world to see.
All the world, mind you, including Somali pirates.
Now, guess what some non-Russian ships from small countries—countries without the supposed clout and superior military force of the United States—do when sailing through the pirate-infested waters of the Gulf of Aden? They hoist Russian flags, knowing that the Somali pirates, wild simians though they be, at least can do some basic visual pattern matching and recognize that that flag indicates the ship is not to be messed with.
One may wonder: How does the “world’s only super power”, with the most technologically-advanced military on the planet, allow its citizens to be killed by a motley band of missing links on barely-seaworthy rafts? Not only that, it’s not like this came out of the blue: These animals have been terrorizing these waters for decades, with a marked increase in these types of incidences over the past few years.
One may also wonder: Why does President Obama, who seems to be highly concerned about shoving a wealth-redistributive healthcare scheme down the throats of protesting majorities, suing his own states for daring to enforce immigration law, or using his massive and massively-financed political machine to topple a duly-elected governor’s attempt to execute the very things he was voted into office to execute—why does this president seem so inept in dealing with these international situations in which Americans are being killed by the world’s most ruthless and brutal thugs?
Any chance it could be his complete and utter lack of real-world experience?
Here’s a hypothetical question: What if those four murdered Americans were…
- Obama’s inaugural benedictory speaker, Reverend Joseph “We ask you to help us work for that day when…when white will embrace what is right” Lowery,
- Obama-appointed [, former] “Green Jobs Czar” Van “Bush was behind 9/11” “That’s When I Became A Communist” Jones,
- Obama’s good friend (and poor, oppressed victim of presumably racist, stupidly-acting Cambridge police officers), Louis “Skip” “Why, because I’m a black man in America?” Gates, and
- Obama’s “pastor” of 20-some years, Reverend Jeremiah “No, no, no! Not God bless America, God damn America!” “U.S. of KKK A.” “[9/11 = ] America’s chickens are coming home to roost” “We started the AIDS virus” Wright
…instead of four folksy, white Christians (who perhaps are undistinguishable to President Obama because they’re, you know, typical white people)—might Obama have been a bit more impassioned about their defense?
(But to question President Obama’s racial biases is, of course, being racist, so I should stop that line of questioning before the thought police come down on me and I lose my job, my friends, my family, and get permanently blackballed from ever participating in “civil society” again.)
Now consider: Of those pirates who brutally murdered those four good, innocent Americans, 13 or 14 (I’ve read some conflicting numbers) will be brought to trial in the US and likely be holed up in a US prison for the rest of their lives.
Please take a moment to consider this: The pirates, who hail from one of the most impoverished, dysfunctional “nations” in the world, are going to be brought to America, put up in comparatively comfortable quarters, fed three squares a day (something they’re certainly not getting on a regular basis at home), given cable TV, books, full workout facilities, healthcare—healthcare—forget “better healthcare”—they now get healthcare whereas in Somalia they have nothing!…lawyers, Imams, Korans, prayer mats, etc…and—hold yourself—all paid for by the American taxpayer.
To pour some additional salt into the wound, keep in mind that when we say “American taxpayer”, we mean almost exclusively productive people who get up every day and go to work and earn a living—which the state and federal governments then strip to pay for, amongst other things, housing lawless, international murderers of innocent American citizens. (Yes, there are also sales taxes and the like that everyone, technically, pays—but factor in what is given back by the state and federal governments to the poorest amongst us, and their net tax contributions are effectively zero—if not more often negative.)
And who are these poorest amongst us? Well, for starters, there are the Somali refugees graciously taken in by “forward-thinking”, “compassionate” Minnesotan liberals. Guess how that’s working out for everyone?
Look, people—for any of you benighted fools out there still gullibly swallowing the Liberal Establishment bullsh-t: Gladly taking in and supporting people who steal your stuff, burn down your house, rape your mothers, beat your fathers, kill your children, and destroy your once-friendly and safe neighborhood because they are functional retards who have no appreciation for all the good things you’ve given them and only hate you all the more for doing so is not “forward-thinking” or “compassionate“—it’s stupid, cowardly, masochistic, and suicidal—not to mention fatally unfair to those who are exposed to these pariahs courtesy of your best-of-intentions.
There is no other way to describe it if one wishes to be forthright.
With that in mind, take a look at the situation in Libya. Remember back in the 80’s when Qaddafi was essentially the proto-Bin Laden, funding and orchestrating terrorist attacks against innocent Americans, Europeans, and Israelis the world over? Remember what made him stop? Give yourself a prize if you answered “President Reagan sent in a squadron of fighter jets and bombed the f*** out of the homes of Qaddafi’s family and paramilitary.” Remember how Qaddafi played nice after that (barring much later reports that he and/or his military were involved in the Lockerbie bombing)?
Next question on the subject: Do you remember when Qaddafi started playing really nice? When he not only ceased killing innocent people for the hell of it, but actually started cooperating with the US—e.g., handing over Muslims extremists, helping to “smoke out” Al Qaeda, etc.? Remember about when that started? Yup—on the heels of the world watching a ragged, filthy Saddam Hussein get pulled out of a “spider hole” by American military and then get his neck stretched courtesy of his fellow Muslim brothers.
And what happened once Obama—the Great American Apologist who would, we were promised by everyone in the Liberal Establishment, turn the tide of world opinion back in favor of the United States after eight years of the “disastrous” “Bush Doctrine” (you know the one—the guiding philosophy that by forcibly converting Iraq into a functioning Democracy, it would create a domino effect whereby the hoi polloi of neighboring nations would realize they didn’t have to live under the thumbs of ruthless dictators, and so would rise up against them—you remember that crazy doctrine that would never, ever, ever work we were repeatedly told, right?)—took the reins of the US? Remember what happened in 2009, within a year of Obama’s inauguration?
Here’s a reminder: That “Lockerbie Bomber” was released back to Libya per Qaddafi’s sudden threats against British Petroleum, who in turn pressured the UK government to provide some assistance.
And when a peaceful (turned violent, and now quickly escalating into an all-out civil war) movement started in Libya this past week to oust Qaddafi and his brutal regime, Qaddafi did what again? That’s right: He unleashed the full force of his military to kill his own countrymen and vowed to defy any and all international pressure to step aside. Remember that? I mean, it’s still happening, so it shouldn’t strain the memory too much.
Imagine: An evil, brutal dictator played nice when America used (or threatened to use) overwhelming force against him, and immediately returned to his evil ways once that charming, “post-racial”, wildly inexperienced, far-left liberal got voted into the White House and gave the warm-and-fuzzy, über-sophisticated, so-not-cowboyish promise to “extend a hand if you’d only unclench your fist.”
And guess what: As Libya descends into violent anarchy (in a Muslim nation—go figure!) and civil war, there are some estimated 5,000 Americans living—and now presumed trapped—within the country.
And what’s been the Obama administration’s efforts to bring them to safety?
Granted, we don’t, can’t, and shouldn’t know the details of those efforts at this time (outside of apparent efforts to ferry them out as I write this)—but can’t one be forgiven for thinking that the ostensible deer-in-headlights pussy-footing that we’re seeing this completely inexperienced administration doing once again as yet another Mid East nation goes up in flames is not some poker face routine but is, on the contrary, exactly as it appears to be: i.e., a far-left administration so focused on “community organizing” the whole of the American people into a macrocosm of hopelessly dysfunctional leftist Chicago (side note: yeah Rahm!) that they once again are caught without a plan, coherent strategy, or desire to deal with the international problems at hand? (Which is, of course, one of the federal government’s very few principle duties.)
And what does this portend for all of those Americans holed up inside an exploding and imploding—and, of course, America-demagoguing—Libya? Will Obama be willing to stop butting into the wholly and solely state politics of Wisconsin (and Indiana and Ohio…) and focus on readying every tool in his arsenal—including overwhelming military force—to bring our fellow Americans home to safety?
Or will those thousands of American citizens in Libya end up like those four innocent white folk recently kidnapped by a gaggle of simians on a dinghy, made so vulnerable and ultimately killed because our Liberal Establishment would rather sacrifice its own citizens than bear the condescension of snotty, adolescent Europeans who’d invariably charge we aren’t sufficiently concerned about the “human dignity” of ruthless barbarians?
All of the above (this blog ain’t called “Logorrheatorium” for nothing, btw) boils down to a simple, commonsensical point: There are evil people in the world, capable of unimaginably horrendous acts, and who will not be swayed by anything except brute f***ing force. And if you really care about humanity—really care, and don’t just pay hip lip service to that notion—then you’d recognize that in the interest of humanity, you’ll have to crack a few [bad] eggs once and awhile.
(Unfortunately, the Liberal Establishment has been hard at work for the past half century caking the eyes of the citizens of the Western World with pie-in-the-sky fantasies about world harmony and Kumbaya while simultaneously erasing the history of the nation that has served as one of the greatest forces for good in the whole of human civilization. As a result, common sense, as they say, ain’t so common any more.)
So the question is not “When did we become this pitiful nation of dim-witted, importunate, ball-less, sniveling Neville Chamberlains?” (obvious answer: the “60’s”), but rather: Will our younger generations do the growing up—and the growing of a pair—that their parents never did? Will they recognize that the real world does not abide by the dictates of Liberal fantasies, but rather uses these fantasies as a means to exploit the naïve, weak, and credulous? And will they be able to muster the honesty, courage, and diligence necessary to restore this nation as a safe and secure haven for the good people of the world, where they can live their lives in freedom, peace, prosperity, and progress?
In short, will American youth resume the mantle that has been dutifully carried by generations of sober-minded and adult Americans (these qualifiers, of course, except the Boomers and X’ers from this noble legacy), or will they adopt the depraved self-indulgence and suicidal insanity of their parents’ generation and watch this grand experiment in human excellence crumble into the pit of debilitating uncertainty, violent chaos, and relentless despair that typifies much of the rest of the world?
While the Obama administration ambivalently (and impotently) sputters as American lives hang in the balance, and though we may not be able to do much for our fellow Americans currently held hostage by the world’s miscreants (both at home and abroad), we can at least try to rescue our future—i.e., our youth—to wake them up from the Liberal Establishment’s induced dogmatic slumber, help them learn to recognize and accept reality for what it is, provide them the spiritual guidance necessary to differentiate right from wrong, and give them the education and resources that will enable them to stand up to and defend themselves and their loved ones against evil men and their sadistic machinations.
Though that task may seem daunting, it is certainly achievable.
And never forget that, as the pitch goes, we got to be in it to win it. If we don’t fight, we can’t win.
More important to the magician’s tools than smoke and mirrors is the simple sleight of hand created by getting people to focus on some red herring while the magician stealthily work just outside the bounds of his audience’s perception.
This is all well and good in the world of “magic” as we are willing participants in the deception—the whole deceptive act is, in fact, a form of great entertainment for many.
But when this deception occurs where it ought not occur—say, in the form of state-sponsored media—we would do well to remain skeptical and look for any possible sleight of hand…and not be so easily distracted and so credulous as to take the man-on-the-stage’s claims at face value.
PBS and NPR often claim they are objective, non-partisan purveyors of news and entertainment. Their defenders may even cite the occasional studies showing that their news programming provides relatively equal times for politicians on “both sides of the aisle”. And they claim that very little of their funding comes from taxpayers (implying, of course, that even if there were a liberal bias across their organizations, it wasn’t like it was costing conservatives too much in the grand scheme of things…so just pipe down you ignorant conservatives!).
To the intellectually torpid and hopelessly partisan, such professions—and purely superficial analytical “evidence”—of integrity and objectivity will suffice. But for the rest of us, this simply will not do.
Instead, let’s look for what’s really going on beneath the words. Let’s look where the real action lies. Let’s, to borrow a phrase, “follow the money.”
A few days ago, House Republicans unveiled a set of decently-sized budget cuts in an effort to demonstrate some horribly-lacking leadership on the dire fiscal crisis the country now finds itself in after six years of Democratic control of Congress (not to mention a half century of Liberal Establishment hegemony). One of those cuts was the defunding of NPR and PBS. That is, the government would no longer subsidize these organizations through their myriad financing channels (Corporation for Public Broadcasting, National Endowment for the Arts, Department of Education, etc.), and thus these entities would have to sink or float based upon their merits (or lack thereof)…just like any other private business in America.
Now, given NPR’s brass’s constant pooh-poohing of any talk of defunding as a “useless” exercise (since they only receive some purported 2% of their funding from taxpayers, and thus defunding serves no material federal budgetary benefit), you would think that the Republican proposal would be a winning proposition for NPR and PBS because a) losing only 2% of their revenue would be an easy loss to absorb, and b) it would exonerate NPR/PBS of the constant conservative charge of being a liberal “state-run media” outfit, thus allowing them to stay largely outside of the political fray given that they are, according to their own claims, “objective, impartial, and non-partisan”.
Of course, this was not NPR’s reaction to the cuts. In fact, a couple of the cartoon characters from their children’s programming will be accompanying some Democratic congressmen to Capitol Hill today to voice their opposition. (See, e.g., here.)
So, if NPR is worried about losing a purported 2% of their funding that is, by their repeated invocations, “negligible”, I take this to mean that they pull in much more than 2% from taxpayers. How could this be? Wouldn’t someone have called them out on this “2%” number since it started getting bandied about on the heels of the deplorable Juan Williams fiasco?
Well, that’s not such an easy one to answer. Apparently the sources of NPR’s funds are incredibly murky…at best. (See, e.g., here.) Side note: How’s that for “transparency”?
Next, you’ll notice that it was Republicans who proposed axing NPR’s funding, with conservatives—justifiably frustrated for being forced to fund a media outlet that, to their eyes, is but one more means by which to ridicule and marginalize them—cheering it on.
You’ll also notice that it is solely
Democratic congressmen who are pulling in the PBS heartstring-tuggers (i.e., cartoon characters…seriously…the ever-infantile mentality of the left) to protest the funding cuts.
So, if Republicans are unanimous that PBS/NPR funding—regardless of how large or small—is an unnecessary federal expenditure and thus should be eliminated as part of some much-needed and long-overdue fiscal discipline, and it is only Democrats who are insisting that the funding is crucial…might that make one a bit suspicious that there may be some substance to the claims of liberal bias pervasive throughout this news and “children’s programming” (don’t let the double entrende escape ya!) media conglomerate?
No? Still dubious?
Ok, what if I told you that the most far-left President in the history of the United States of America has not only refused to consider cutting funding, but actually just proposed his own budget in which he increased funding for NPR/PBS?
And then what about if NPR issued a public “thank you” to said far-left President for this proposed increase?
Ok, what about MoveOn.org—the nation’s liberals’ “grass-roots” operation that is owned and operated by about the most radically-left leftists—creating a petition to “save NPR” from evil Republican defunding efforts?
Quote (emphasis mine):
“Congress must save NPR and PBS once and for all. Congress should guarantee permanent funding and independence from partisan meddling.”
(The crass Orwellian doublespeak and Statist-media-control messaging in MoveOn’s statement above is a clear indicator of both the desperation of the left, and why they are rightly despised with such passion by anyone with a brain and a conscience.)
What then? What should one conclude when nearly every facet of the hardcore liberal establishment comes out in defense of an opaquely taxpayer-funded news and “children’s programming” media conglom when faced with unanimous conservative desire to remove its public funding?
Is this not seeing the sleight of hand for what it is? Is this not telling of a left-leaning bias—however well concealed, however well removed from public perception—throughout our venerated NPR and PBS programming?
The common wisdom is that you know who your true friends are when the chips are down. Well, for NPR at least, the chips are down; their public funding is on the chopping block. And the only people to come to NPR’s defense are—wholly and solely—leftists.
And you don’t gain leftists’ loyalty by maintaining a strict discipline of political impartiality, do you? No, quite the opposite, in fact.
And so, wouldn’t you agree, that there is perhaps something up the sleeve of those fighting for NPR’s funding that we should be paying more attention to?
I certainly do.
And now I must conclude with this obligatory Jefferson quote:
“To compel a man to furnish funds for the propagation of ideas he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical.”
– Thomas Jefferson
Post-60’s journalism “journalism” in a nutshell: http://www.youtube.com/user/Battlefield315#p/u/2/zF3hbPtCttc
W: I can filter out all the inaccurate stuff.
W: I can use my liberal world-view as a guide. If anything contradicts it, I know it either didn’t really happen, or wasn’t worth reporting.
M: I see a Pulitzer Prize in your future!
Hear about the white politicians in Charlotte, North Carolina who conspired with all—all—of the local hotels and conference centers to prevent the NAACP from gathering and holding a meeting with its supporters anywhere within the city limits? No? Well, that’s because it never happened.
Of course, if it did happen, we’d all hear about it non-stop for months, and we’d have legislation pouring out of Washington to try to prevent any possible future evil, racist, white fascists from trying to suppress anyone’s Constitutionally-guaranteed freedom of speech ever again. And protests—violent, demagoguing protests by the Liberal Establishment’s ridiculous brownshirts. And imagine the lawsuits! Oh, the lawsuits and sums of damages that Revrum Al, Jesse Jackson, and their merry band of scumbag lawyers could drum up! Lawd, al’mighty!
Now, take the same exact situation, but reverse the races. Oh, and, instead of being a hypothetical situation, this one’s real.
Oh, and one more detail: This is the second year in a row that this has happened (last year by threats of violence, this year courtesy the collusion of local government and business leaders).
How much attention has the media given this real news story of the suppression of the Constitutionally-guaranteed rights to peaceable assembly and speech of intelligent, kind, civilized, patriotic Americans? Well, I’m confident that faithful consumers of Soviet-era Pravda the MSM will never have heard of it.
“Local news station WSOC-TV said that Cannon “feared violent opposition to the group’s presence in the Queen City” and quoted him as saying,“We’ve always been about trying to be as inclusive as we possibly can be, and I will tell you when you have extreme groups on any side coming, it should raise a red flag.” [White Nationalist Group Banned From Charlotte Hotel, WSOC-TV, January 27, 2011]
This seems to be an acknowledgement that he is not really worried about violence coming from American Renaissance attendees—given their track record, he had no reason to—but by violent left-wing protesters.
This raises the question: why doesn’t he use his “bully pulpit”, as an as an African American Democrat, to tell these left wing “anti-racist” activists to respect other’s rights?
Of course these commonsense questions are never asked by the Main Stream Media. In fact, outside of the local Charlotte media and publications like VDARE.com and AlternativeRight, absolutely no one is even mentioning the cancellation of the conference.”
Of course not. The MSM, like any propagandist organ serving at the pleasure of a totalitarian ruling class, employs deception less through outright lies (as it’s tough to save face when caught passing off pure fiction as solid fact; see, e.g., Dan Rather) than they do via amplifying news that fits their agenda, and minimizing—or outright omitting—news that contradicts it or might otherwise give the unwashed masses “dangerous” ideas.
But let’s be clear: This lack of reporting of the egregious oppression of American Renaissance’s rights is not just an example of MSM bias by omission. We also have plenty of examples of outright lies/misinformation. Do a search in Google News on “Jared Taylor” and at least half the headlines come up describing AR as “White Supremacist” or “Anti-Semitic” (e.g., here). Spend just a few minutes on Taylor’s American Renaissance
site and you’ll find no claims of white supremacy in any regard (Taylor himself claims to be a “yellow-supremacist”, repeatedly citing Asians’ perpetual topping of all measures of intellectual achievement), and certainly nothing that could possibly be described as “anti-Semitic” (there are many active Jewish contributors and participants at American Renaissance, Taylor does not differentiate between “white” and “Jewish”, and he is actually hated by neo-Nazi types for this perceived “philo-Semitism”). Beyond this, there is nary a sign of racist language proper—no vulgarity, no slurs, no cruel or unnecessary maligning of any individual or group. What Taylor and his fellow contributors at American Renaissance provide are simply 1) links to [typically local] news stories that “somehow” never find their way onto the national networks or major newspapers, and 2) links to an array of books, articles, and other reference materials that are civil, scholarly, intelligent, empirically-based studies that contradict the Liberal Establishment’s many preposterous and outright deceitful dogmas.
And lastly, this [non-] story serves as a case in point of the MSM’s third method of “information management”: unabashedly insulting and smearing those who present an alternative perspective to the Liberal Orthodoxy. The examples abound, but perhaps none quite capture it so neatly and concisely as this piece by the Charlotte Observer: Free speech covers all, even the primitive.
Don’t believe me? Think I’m running interference for Taylor and American Renaissance, trying to put a happy face on anachronistic racists who threaten all the supposed racial progress we’ve made since Leftists infested every hall of power in American politics and culture? Well, fine—don’t believe me. But while you’re at it, be fair about it and don’t believe the MSM’s version either. Instead, go do your own fact-checking. Like conservatives in general (unlike leftists almost universally), Taylor says what he means and means what he says, and his work is out there for all to see, fully exposed, without any deceit or trickery: www.amren.com. Go there. Go find evidential support for the MSM’s lazy, libelous characterization of “White Supremacism”, of “Anti-Semitism”, of “Racism”, of “Hate”, of “Ignorance”, of “Xenophobia”, of “Primitiveness”, or any other such ad hominem smear.
Now, if you’ve done your homework over at AmRen.com and perhaps a bit on Jared Taylor, reexamine the MSM’s characterization of American Renaissance and/or Jared Taylor (when it bothers to mention either one at all). So…how well does that characterization jibe with what you found during your own research?
All hail our liberal stewards of objective journalism!
It is a fact—as much a fact that the earth revolves around the sun and the moon is not made of cheese—that the MSM has a far-left agenda, and that they drive this agenda with all the devious perfidy of any of the [staggeringly violent] Statist regimes of the past century who sought their rise to—and maintenance of—power via carefully controlling what the people know, what they don’t, and what stays at the forefront of their political thinking (via repetition and emphasis of the establishment’s formulated talking points).
Anyone with their eyes open and a shred of intellectual honesty understands and admits as much. The trouble is the good and honest people out there who have not ventured off the information monopoly of the Fourth Estate Plantation and into the blogosphere where red-blooded Americans—and freedom lovers the planet over—are hacking away, desperately, at the foundation of the Liberal Establishment before it snuffs out yet one more great civilization.
(And, what’s more, this is not just one more great civilization. Like the title of Bill Bennett’s book, America truly is the world’s last, best hope.)
Hear about that shooting in Tucson of US Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords? What has been the MSM narrative that, despite ever-mounting evidence against that very narrative, started the moment the bodies fell and continues—though largely abated—to this day? Give yourself a prize if you answered that “radical, right-wing” rhetoric of radical, racist, “overwhelmingly white”, ignorant, violent, bible-thumping, trigger-happy, redneck Tea Partiers—along with Sarah Palin’s cross hairs over Gifford’s district (but not, of course, the DNC’s maps with targets and bulls’ eyes)—were to blame for creating a toxic, vitriolic, violent “climate of hate” that inspired a clearly schizophrenic individual to shoot a bunch of random people. (Including a conservative federal judge—and, incidentally, the only public official killed by the insinuated “right-wing-inspired” killer. By the way, what was that slain conservative judge’s name again? Oh…you don’t know? Why not? If you heard his name mentioned in casual conversation, would you immediately recognize it as belonging to the lone political murder of Jared Loughner? What about for the name “Gabrielle Giffords”—would you recognize that name if brought up randomly? And might the name “Sarah Palin” also come to mind, attached, as it were, as if by some causal link? You may wish to re-read the paragraph above that begins with “It is a fact…”)
So, in this MSM-created miasma of “guilty-before-proven-innocent”, only to be followed by “guilty-despite-being-proven-innocent”, did you hear about the guy who threatened—on camera, during an ABC news episode about the “camaraderie” and “coming together” of the Tucson community after the tragedy—the very life of a Tea Party leader in the audience? (Quote: “You’re dead.“) Hmm? We do still hear talk about “toning down the rhetoric” and engaging in “civil discourse” don’t we? (Which, of course, applies only to Republicans and conservatives and not—not, I repeat—to Democrats and liberals.) Well, what about this story—about a guy clearly driven to his violent hate of a Tea Partier courtesy of the MSM’s obsession with insinuating—if not some outright declaring—that the blame for the murder of six innocent people lie squarely upon those in the quote-unquote “Tea Party”?
What about the rally in Oakland ostensibly held for the same purpose—to honor the Tucson victims and stand in solidarity with the survivors—the one that descended into an anti-white, anti-conservative hate-fest…which the local news obligingly tuned out? That story ring a bell?
Amplify that which fits the agenda, minimize or omit that which detracts from it.
Besides not wanting to put the Liberal Establishment’s foot soldiers (and thus the Liberal Establishment itself) in a bad light, anyone else find it highly coincidental that a local channel in Oakland, the national news network ABC, and who knows how many other local news bureaus that honest citizen journalists may have missed, found it so important to start broadcasting stories specifically about national solidarity with the Tucson shooting victims…right around the time President Obama made his official speech in Tucson…a speech that was literally branded—replete with white & blue (what? no red?) posters and placards and t-shirts and such—with the slogan “Together We Thrive”? Pure coincidence that the MSM seemed to be marching in lock-step with the White House’s message, so much so that they systematically flagrantly dropped any and all evidence that the country was not only not united in grief, but was, in fact, viciously divided thanks to liberals’ immediate attempts the nation over to exploit the tragedy as a means to smear and silence their political opponents?
Again, are journalists there to drive the federal government’s message—even if, as in this case, the message is an entirely appropriate one—or to report the truth—the whole truth, and nothing but the truth—of whatever it is they’re covering?
And between these two poles—between [poorly] surreptitiously advancing the ruling class’s talking points vs. stalwart reporting of the facts, no matter how inconvenient or demoralizing they may be—where do the actions of the MSM consistently lie?
Speaking of people being driven to violent acts by the words of politicians and the climate their sycophants create, anyone remember the story about the guy who went on a shooting rampage at Discovery Channel headquarters…because—BECAUSE—in his own words—he was inspired by Al Gore’s fraudulent “documentary”
An Inconvenient Truth? Remember that? Remember all the conservatives on “radical, right-wing” Fox “Faux” News implying that Al Gore, the global “global warming” conspiracy, the socialistic greenies, and the legions of all the above’s useful idiots were to blame for this shooting? Don’t remember that either? That’s because it never happened. See, when one is based in reality, it’s easy to understand that crazy people will do crazy things and draw inspiration from anywhere. We should no more shut-up Al Gore or Sarah Palin or the Tea Partiers than we should censor all movies and images of Jodie Foster because John Hinckley Jr. shot President Ronald Reagan out of his psychotic obsession with the actress. Conservatives get that. Liberals don’t.
Because leftist thinking isn’t based in reality. It’s based in power. And they [leftists] will do and say anything and everything to maintain that power.
I’ll leave with just a few of the more recent gems from our USSA’s state-led MSM:
- Remember those KKK members in full garb standing outside the voting booths during the 2008 Presidential elections, brandishing cudgels and yelling threatening, racial slurs at black voters? Remember all the media attention that received? Remember when multiple members of the Department of Justice resigned in protest because they claimed the DoJ was actively refusing to prosecute white people, instead focusing their efforts on prosecuting blacks and Hispanics instead? Remember when an internal investigation backed up these claims and found the DoJ was, in fact, espousing a race-based agenda regarding pursuing federal prosecutions? Remember? Right; I’ve reversed the races here, so this story has been dutifully swept under the rug.
- Say, recall the endless headlines whenever an anti-abortion extremist murders an extremist abortionist? And what happens when the murderer is an abortionist? Crickets, perhaps?
- I think the MSM forgot to tell the DR about the wonders and strengths of diversity! Dominican crackdown on Haitian migrants sows fear
- Anyone hear about this little tidbit? I’m guessing not.
- MSM devotees, happen to catch this story? Behold the glory of lax immigration policies and open borders!
- And for the win: Just how eager are “journalists” to report anything that helps them to smear the right? Answer: This eager.
“There’s no earthly way of knowing,
Which direction we are going.
There’s no knowing where we’re rowing
Or which way the river’s flowing.
Is it raining?
Is it snowing?
Is a hurricane a-blowing?
Not a speck of light is showing,
So the danger must be growing.
Are the fires of hell a glowing?
Is the grisly reaper mowing?
Yes! The danger must be growing,
For the rowers keep on rowing,
And they’re certainly not showing
Any signs that they are slowing!”
“Wonka, this has gone far enough!”
“Quite right, Sir! STOP THE BOAT!”
To all who have eyes yet are not yet seeing the danger, I beg you, stop the boat!