Posts Tagged ‘media bias
Ron Paul, Herman Cain Trounce Mitt Romney and Rick Perry at Values Voters Summit. Media Reaction: Crickets
As a freelance journalist and public relations expert, I’m here to point out media bias so Hillbuzzers everywhere can learn to recognize it, and protect themselves from being made into Eeyores by manipulation by the government-controlled media.
If you are not an educated consumer of media coverage, you’re in danger of mistaking it for the truth, instead of opinion disguised as fact.
Today’s lesson comes courtesy the Values Voters Summit that took place over the weekend. This sixth-annual event, organized by the Family Research Council, includes training sessions for conservative activists; speeches by politicians who are (or are pretending to be) conservatives; and a presidential straw poll.
The Values Voters Summit is recognized by the government-controlled media as a leading indicator of conservative voter opinion, unless, of course, the media-annointed, hand-picked, “it’s their turn” candidates get their butts kicked in the straw poll. If anyone but this year’s media-declared candidates win, the event is “fixed.”
Here are the results:
Ron Paul – 37 percent
Herman Cain – 23 percent
Rick Santorum – 16 percent
Rick Perry – 8 percent
Michele Bachmann – 8 percent
Mitt Romney – 4 percent
Newt Gingrich – 3 percent
Undecided – 1 percent
Jon Huntsman – 0 percent
Yes, Jon “I Look Just Like Mitt” Huntsman lost to “Undecided.”
So, where’s the bias?
This story from ABC News gives us some great material to analyze.
The headline is, “Ron Paul Wins 2011 Values Voter Straw Poll, Herman Cain Takes Second Place.” So you might expect the story to be about Ron Paul and Herman Cain.
Well, you’d be half-right.
Remember, the Washington press corps votes 98% Democrat. They are essentially in the employ of the Obama Regime. They thing they’re “normal” and they think you–the patriotic, tax-paying, gun-owning, church-going, responsible Americans–are a reactionary, right-wing, bigoted raaaaaacist fanatics. You have to evaluate all government-controlled media coverage in that context.
The story is 572 words long. The first paragraph of 24 words is about Ron Paul:
The Texas congressman and presidential candidate who remains in the single digits in most national polls emerged as the choice of 37 percent of those who cast ballots at the annual Values Voter Summit in Washington, D.C. [bias emphasized]
But interestingly, the paragraph also subliminally tells you, the conservative voter, to ignore the results of this straw poll of conservatives, because Ron Paul “remains in the single digits in most national polls.” Which national polls? Of whom? Voters? Likely voters? Adults? Other members of the government-controlled media? Mittens Romney’s campaign staff? The Obama Regime? We’ll never know, because the ABC News reporter thinks we’re too stupid and gullible to ask.
Why is Ron Paul in single digits, when he gets consistently high rankings from Conservative watchdog groups like the National Taxpayers Union? Could it be because of biased coverage like this? Could it be because hand-picked “frontrunner” RINO candidates get hundreds of times more media coverage?
Single-digit poll results don’t stop the government-controlled media from telling you, the conservative voter, that Jon Huntsman is a “frontrunner.”
And single digit poll results don’t stop the government-controlled media from telling you, the conservative voter, in this same story that “Current GOP front-runner Mitt Romney…wound up near the bottom of the pack with 4 percent.”
How can a “journalist” write a sentence like that with a straight face?
How many more straw polls will Mittens Romneycare, Rick “I Heart Illegals” Perry and Jon “RINO” Hunstman have to lose before the government-controlled media stops putting the word “frontrunner” in front of their names? (It’s a trick question–they will never stop.)
In this 572-word story, which is ostensibly about Ron Paul winning the Values Voters Straw Poll, Ron Paul only gets 79 words of coverage, and two of those references are dismissive and negative.
Even though ABC news sent an intrepid reporter into the crowd to “take the temperature of the cultural conservative voters,” and more than one out of every three participants voted for Ron Paul, she apparently couldn’t locate a single Ron Paul voter to interview. Hmmm.
Herman Cain is the big winner in this story. He gets 196 words, all positive. And ABC News managed to hunt down and quote two Cain voters for the article.
With a third-place (16%) finish, you’d expect that the brain trust at ABC News would want to talk to or about Rick Santorum. Nope!
Instead, ABC news chose to boost Rick Perry, who gets 166 words of coverage (more than twice as much coverage as Ron Paul, the winner, and just slightly less than Herman Cain, the second-place finisher) despite earning an embarrassing 8% of the votes. All of Rick Perry’s coverage is positive.
So, conservative voters, here are the messages ABC News wants you to take away from this story:
- You’re stupid if you vote for Ron Paul. You should ignore him like we do!
You’re only slightly less stupid if you vote for Herman Cain.
Mitt Romney is the frontrunner. Because we say so.
Rick Perry is the serious candidate. Because we say so.
Here are a couple more illustrations of media bias around this news story:
First, a Google search engine results screen capture for the search phrase “Ron Paul Values Voters.” This search brings up TWENTY-SIX news stories in the first group of results, most of which don’t include the actual news–he WON! The most prominent story in the second group of results says that the event was “fixed.”
A search on “Herman Cain Values Voters” brings up FOUR HUNDRED FORTY-ONE news stories in the first group of results.
Big loser Mittens Romneycare, who only beat “Undecided” by 3%, scored ONE THOUSAND, NINE HUNDRED AND SEVENTY-THREE news stories about this event. That’s seventeen times more news coverage than the winner. I didn’t read them all, but I assume that each contains the word “frontrunner.”
Is it any wonder that you don’t consider Herman Cain or Ron Paul as a “serious” candidate? Do you even know what their positions are? Or have you already let the government-controlled media make your decision for you?
Every time you read a newspaper, you’re being manipulated. Every time you watch the TV news, you’re being manipulated. The story I’ve linked above contains several subliminal editorial comments designed to push you toward Obama-Regime-approved candidates Mittens Romneycare and Rick Gardisil Perry, and away from the two candidates who were the overwhelming choice of the conservative activists who paid to get in to the Values Voters Summit.
Your job is to research the candidates yourself, without the media filters. Learn to recognize that words like “frontrunner” are meant to brainwash you.
Get up off the sofa.
Put down the Pepsi.
Turn off the TV.
And do the legwork required to be an informed voter.
In this election, MODERATION EQUALS DEATH.
The GOP nominee will be the next president of the United States.
This means that the GOP nominee has to care less about re-election than he or she cares about killing Obamacare.
The GOP nominee has to care less about pleasing the Lamestream Media than they care about gutting the tax code.
The GOP nominee has to care less about “reaching across the aisle” than they care about killing unconstitutional federal departments and programs and sending them to the the States, to local government, or the People (or oblivion).
The GOP nominee has to care less about being called a RAAAAACIST by race pimps like Al Sharpton than they care about killing in-state tuition, free healthcare, free housing, welfare, and other taxpayer handouts to illegal aliens.
The GOP nominee has to care less about pleasing the shrieking socialists in the government employee unions than they care about killing the Department of Education.
The GOP nominee has to care less about pandering to the AARP than they care about ending the National Debt.
Nominating anyone who isn’t serious about doing anything and everything it takes to save this Republic, will mean the end of America as we know it.
Anyone who cares more about being re-elected, being liked by the LSM, sucking up to the NEA, pandering to La Raza, throwing sops to seniors, and being the perfect cucumber-and-mayo-on-white-bread, inoffensive, go-along-to-get-along, moderate, kumbaya, Cocktail Party Establishment GOP candidate, doesn’t deserve to be president.
As Michelle Bachmann said, conservatives and libertarians are sick of hearing that we have to settle for a moderate.
Settling for an “electable” moderate got us Bob Dole.
Settling got us John McCain.
This year, moderation is the difference between careening off the cliff at 60 miles an hour versus 80 miles an hour.
A moderate will not keep us from going over the cliff.
A moderate–no matter how slick he is on TV, or how “electable” the LSM says he is, how perfect his hair is, or how “presidential” he looks–is fundamentally incapable of making the piss-everyone-off decisions that are necessary to save this country.
The Phase Change Toward Ron Paul and Tea Party Principles: Why An Establishment Republican Can’t Win In 2012
One of the things I enjoy most about writing for Hillbuzz is watching the uptick in hate mail that my Ron-Paul-oriented posts generate. Here at Buzzquarters, we consider that a sign that we’re doing something right, since such a huge percentage of the manufactured outrage we receive is sent in by paid operatives and concern trolls.
I enjoy knowing that we’re helping to deplete a secret “dirty tricks” campaign slush fund in the basement of the White House or the Romney Campaign Headquarters. And even more fun is knowing that most Hillbuzzers are sophisticated enough (by now) to be able to spot concern trolls and paid operatives from a mile away, so those slush fund dollars are going right down the toilet.
This post should generate a lot of billings to those slush funds.
I don’t enjoy linking to HuffPo, but an opinion piece there today is so outstanding and insightful that I couldn’t resist. It was written by a UK native, Robin Koerner, who is in a unique position to comment on U.S. politics–he runs a website called WatchingAmerica.com, which gathers and translates into English foreign news stories about America.
Side note, my favorite piece on WatchingAmerica.com today is an article from Austria’s Der Standard, About Weak Leadership, which includes a gem you will never see in America’s “mainstream” media:
Two-and-a-half years after his election, Barack Obama, the first African-American president in the history of the United States, is in danger of becoming a one-term president, a failure who has largely lost the support of the urban liberals, workers, black and Hispanic Americans, environmentalists and youth of the 2008 election through his hesitation and wavering. The 50-year-old Obama is no longer the shining light for the start of a new age, but rather a politician, who, through his zigzag course and sellouts in economic, finance and social policy, has deeply disappointed the (admittedly inflated) expectations of his supporters.
So, apparently the Hopeychange has worn off in Europe, too.
Anyway, Mr. Koerner writes in the Huffington Post four words that strike terror into the hearts of both the Cocktail Party GOP and Obama Regime: Ron Paul Can Win.
And better than anyone else so far (including me) Koener has, I believe, correctly identified the political, historic and cultural forces that are coming together to make this presidential campaign unlike anything we’ve seen in our lifetimes. It explains the rise of the Tea Party movement (fueled originally by Ron Paul supporters). It also explains the shrinking ranks of both “major” parties. Koener writes,
One has to reach back a good way in American history for a time of such rapidly rising sentiment that not only are our leaders unable even to think of real solutions to the problems of greatest concern (rather than just making expedient changes at the margin), but also that the prevailing political and economic system is structurally incapable of delivering any long-term solutions in its current form.
The sheer range and interconnectedness of the problems that the nation faces are such that any permanent solution to any one of them will require profound systemic change that will necessarily upset many economic, political and cultural equilibria. And that is nothing more than a definition of a national phase change.
The average American may not know what is to be done, but she can sense when the system has exhausted all its possibilities. At that point, not only does the phase change become reasonable; it becomes desirable — even if what lies on the other side cannot be known.
Koerner also correctly identifies the spine-cracking contortions the mainstream media must put itself through to ignore Ron Paul’s ascendancy in this campaign cycle, brilliantly encapsulated in this John Stewart bit on The Daily Show: Ron Paul and the “Top Tier”.
“If it is true that the studied neglect of data to hold tight to a paradigm is the best evidence that the paradigm is about to collapse,” says Koerner, “then the massive and highly subjective neglect of all things Paulian is specific evidence that the country is moving in Paul’s direction.”
And the LSM has had plenty of practice ignoring this impending paradigm shift–though it wasn’t just Ron Paul. They had the Tea Party movement on “ignore” for most of 2008. Finally, when the Tea Party movement became “worthy” of media attention in about 2009, it was only so the homeschoolers, Constitutionalists, religious people, veterans, entrepreneurs, retirees, patriots and other “undesirables” who make up the Tea Party movement could be labeled “extremists” and “RAAAAACISTS.”
And yet, Koerner continues,
…on all the metrics that a year ago everyone accepted as useful indicators of political standing, Ron Paul is not just a front-runner but a strong one.
First, and most directly, he does extremely well in polls. The organization of his grassroots support is not just excellent; it is remarkable, by historic and global measures. His ability to raise money from actual voters is second to none. His appeal to independents and swing voters is an order of magnitude greater than that of his competitors. Secondarily, he has more support from military personnel than all other candidates put together, if measured by donations; he has the most consistent voting record; he has the magical quality of not coming off as a politician; he oozes integrity and authenticity, and, as far as we know, he has a personal life and marriage that reflects deep stability and commitment.
Two years later, the economy is far, far worse than anyone in Washington, DC will admit. A new CNN poll reveals that only 34% of Americans surveyed approve of how Obama is handling the economy. (I suspect they all work for the government.) Not surprisingly, most Democrats (68%) approve, and most Republicans (91%) disapprove–but a striking 71% of Independents think Obama is a loser on economic issues.
And yet, our Messiah in Chief and his wife Michelle Antoinette felt comfortable taking separate taxpayer-funded jets to a lavish $5 MILLION vacation to the playground of the rich and famous.
The disconnect between the “reality” of Washington, DC, where yesterday’s biggest story was the president’s attempt to upstage the long-scheduled GOP debate with his latest retread big-government “jobs plan,” and what the rest of the country is going through, couldn’t be more obvious, or less reported in the LSM.
Since January of 2009, the Obama Regime has partied its way through the Treasury, buying itself lavish gifts, luxury vehicles, vacations in elite locales, gourmet meals; creating countless kickback programs for political buddies; subsidizing a permanent unemployed class and pissing away our childrens’ and grandchildrens’ futures.
Real people are suffering, every single day, in this country. Millions of people can’t even read this post today because they haven’t had electricity since Saturday, thanks to Hurricane Irene. By now, all the perishable food they owned is garbage. Their homes are gone; their clothes, their cars, their family photos, their keepsakes; and in some cases, their pets or loved ones. Their jobs may be gone, along with their life savings, if they didn’t have flood insurance.
And because the Federal government has borrowed and spent like drunken, dissipated, self-hating, irresponsible sailors since Obama was elected, there is no money to help these people. None.
When Americans need help here in America, there’s no one left to help us.
Because we have troops deployed in 140 foreign countries, our own borders are wide open to illegal aliens, drug gangs and Islamic terrorists.
Our infrastructure is crumbling…but we’re borrowing money from China to build bridges in Afghanistan.
The citizens of Vermont who have been cut off by flood waters are desperate for food, but have to wait for help from Illinois National Guard units because the Vermont National Guard’s entire helicopter fleet is deployed on a mission in Iraq.
We are $14 TRILLION in debt and what do we have to show for it?
Literally hundreds of thousands of brave Americans have given their lives over the past two and a half centuries to secure our freedom, and what do we have to show for it?
It is facts like these that are fueling the deep angst among the people who built America and make it work. It’s fueling nostalgia for a time in our lives when there were more jobs than people looking for work. When the United States was an unapologetic superpower that had just broken the Soviet Union, then the greatest threat to the security of the world. When we had presidents one could disagree with on policy–but whose patriotism and belief in the American Dream was unquestioned. When parents truly believed that their children would be more successful, healthier, and lead better lives than they did.
And whether the LSM and establishment politicians want to acknowledge it or not, it is this gap between today’s reality and the America so many of us remember that is going to determine who wins in November, and whether or not this country survives. Says Koerner,
To believe that Ron Paul’s victory is a long shot in spite of all standard indicators that directly contradict this claim is to throw out all norms with which we follow our nation’s politics — and that is a huge thing to do. The only way it can be done honestly is to present another set of contradictory reasons or metrics that are collectively more powerful than all those that you are rejecting. I am yet to find them….Of course, none of this means that Paul will definitely win. But it does mean that a bet against him by a politician is foolhardy and by a journalist is dishonest.
An ordinary, inoffensive, cucumber and mayo Republican has no chance. Because in their hearts, no one believes an ordinary Republican will have the guts to ruthlessly excise the cancerous tumor that is the Obama Regime, and then go after over 75 years of unconstitutional big-government malignancy that have metastasized into every facet of our lives.
This is not a year in which an ordinary politician can win. It’s not a year in which we can afford four more years of politics as usual.
To defeat the Left, it’s important for libertarians and conservatives to understand how media coverage works to shape the debate. And it’s vital that we be able to recognize when a RINO candidate (such as John Huntsman or Mittens “Mood Ring” Romney) is being shoved down our throats, lest we get a repeat of Bob Dole and John McCain.
However, it’s just as important for us to recognize when the media is using sleight-of-hand and misdirection to keep us from seeing what’s behind the curtain.
Although this story was posted on Drudge today, I doubt that you will see this headline anywhere:
Gallup Poll: Romney, Perry, Paul & Bachman In Dead Heat With Obama Among Registered Voters
A survey of 879 registered voters conducted August 17th and 18th reveals that the Top Tier of GOP candidates is Mitt “Mood Ring” Romney, Rick Perry, Ron Paul and Michelle Bachmann. The margin of error is +/- 4%.
When considering the 4% margin of error, all four GOP candidates would be in a statistical dead heat with Obama if the election were held today.
And Mittens, Perry and Ron Paul all beat Obama among Independents, which Michelle Bachmann not far behind.
And another interesting statistic: Herman Cain has incredibly high “positives,” beating out all the other GOP candidates.
Now, why is this important?
Because you WILL NOT see this voter preference reflected in media coverage.
If you’re a new reader, some background for you. I’ve been a Ron Paul fan for at least 10 years. I know Ron’s positions on the issues inside and out. I’m pretty familiar with his voting record. And because PR is my profession, I pay a LOT of attention to media coverage and bias.
Yes, there is bias against all GOP candidates. But because my focus has been Ron Paul, I’m in more of a position to notice bias in coverage of his campaign. And the bias against him has been outlandishly obvious. It used to take the form of complete fabrications about his policy issues or voting record. But now, it’s most often a bizarre, near-total news blackout. As John Stewart asked on The Daily Show, since when does the second-place finisher in the Iowa Straw Poll become the 13th floor in a hotel?
Of course, this frustrates me, as a Ron Paul supporter. But what frustrates me more is GOP voters continuing to get their candidate information from the lamestream media.
And just to clarify…I don’t care whether or not you like Ron Paul! I know that Kevin will work tirelessly for Sarah Palin once she enters the race. And I would be thrilled with a Sarah Palin presidency.
What I’m urging you is to do your due diligence on EVERY GOP CANDIDATE.
Do not let the overwhelmingly Leftist Washington Press Corpse tell you who is “electable” or “top tier” or “serious.” That’s YOUR decision to make. We will only know who is electable after the election.
Put the pejorative “unelectable” in the garbage with “polarizing,” where it belongs.
And remember, when the Lamestream Media calls a GOP candidate–ANY GOP candidate—”polarizing” or “not serious” or “unelectable,” that’s code for “Oh sh*t…this one could beat Teh Messiah.”
UPDATE: The Pew Research Center’s Project for Excellence in Journalism conducted a study of news coverage in the days after the Iowa Straw Poll. The word “shocking” is perhaps overused when referring to blatant media bias…but kids, it doesn’t get much worse than this:
Barack Hussein Obama, who is not a Muslim, has received the bulk of media coverage since January 1st.
Pew’s analysis of three network Sunday morning shows on August 14, the a.m. and p.m. network news programs on August 15, and four hours of prime-time cable and one hour of daytime from each of the three major cable news networks on August 15 revealed that Ron Paul was mentioned just 29 times.
By comparison, the LSM covered Rick Perry 371 times, Michelle Bachmann was mentioned 274 times, and Mittens Romneycare was mentioned 183 times.
The Ruling Class Cocktail Party GOP Elite is that nerdy, bespectacled, gangly library-bound girl in 9th grade who is so desperate for the approval of the cruel and terminally hip kids in the “cool” clique (The Media) that she’ll do anything to her her former friends in Math Club (the Tea Party voters) to get it.
This desperate need to be liked by people who will never like her drives The Party of Stupid to play practical jokes on her former Math Club friends at the behest of the “cool kids”…pranks like raising the debt ceiling, passing TARP, “compromising,” “reaching across the aisle,” and passing prescription drug coverage.
And yet, even when they act like the most vile of Democrats, even when they totally alienate the friends in Math Club they’ve had since 2nd grade, the Cocktail Party GOP is still not good enough for The Media, and never, ever will be.
This pathology is what feeds Eeyorism, that momentum-killing tendency for GOP voters to throw in the towel after reading negative news stories about how “unbeatable” the non-Muslim Barack Hussein Obama is.
If you actually get your impression from reality from Lamestream media coverage, you MUST get over it and start getting your news online. 98% of the Washington Press Corps votes for Democrats. They sincerely believe that all conservatives and libertarians are brain-dead, RAAAAAACIST, homophobic, cousin-marrying, Earth-hating, book-burning, Bible-thumping, misogynistic, Neanderthal freaks.
If you’ve been reading Hillbuzz for more than ten minutes, you know all about media bias. During the 2008 campaign it took the form of fawning, slavish adoration of an arrogant but unknown junior Sentator who spent his part-time gig in the Illinois Senate voting “present” and getting sweetheart real estate deals. (Oh, and “playing basketball.”)
With virtually no exceptions, the political media was so enraptured by the thrills running up their collective legs that they couldn’t be bothered to report on the mysterious circumstances of Obama’s birth, his poorly-Photoshopped “birth certificate,” his questionable paternity, his attendance at a Muslims-only grade school in a foreign country, his drug habit, his Marxism, his complete lack of academic records, his entirely undistinguished stint as a law professor who published nothing, his friendship with domestic terrorists, his America-hating church, his scorched-earth whisper campaigns that always ensured he would run unopposed, his total lack of executive experience, his illegal foreign campaign contributions, his health problems, his “57 States” gaffe (among many others), his overall contempt for the free market, and his absence of any qualifications whatsoever.
But we shouldn’t hold it against them. There are only so many hours in the day, and they had very little time left after pawing through the potato peels, reassembling the shredded electric bills, and poking through the used Kleenex in Sarah Palin’s garbage.
But today, the media bias against Republican candidates reached a point of such outrageousness that it finally attracted the attention of…the media, which was finally forced to call itself out.
Beneath a terribly ironic photo of a sad and tired-looking Ron Paul during a pause in his speech at the Iowa Straw Poll, Politico columnist Roger Simon says,
I admit I do not fully understand Ron Paul and his beliefs. But I do understand when a guy gets shafted, and Ron Paul just got shafted.
Simon reported that the event and the results of the straw poll got nearly wall-to-wall media coverage–including the annointing of a new “Top Tier” consisting of of Ames winner Michelle Bachmann, and, strangely, “two candidates who skipped Ames, Mitt Romney and Rick Perry.”
Despite finishing nine-tenths of one percentage point, or 152 votes out of 16,892 cast, behind Bachmann, there was a sudden and nearly complete blackout of Ron Paul coverage. Simon observes,
A Wall Street Journal editorial Monday magnanimously granted Paul’s showing in the straw poll a parenthetical dismissal: “(Libertarian Ron Paul, who has no chance to win the nomination, finished a close second.)” […]
I am far from a Libertarian. I believe big government is swell as long as it does big things to help the common good. But after Ames, it was as if Paul had been sentenced to the Phantom Zone.
Bachmann appeared on five Sunday shows following Ames. Paul appeared on none….But if Bachmann’s victory at Ames was good enough to gain her enormous publicity and top-tier status, why was Paul’s virtual tie good enough only to relegate him to being ignored? … So I asked Paul Monday if the media blackout disturbed him.
“It did disturb me, but it was not a total surprise,” he replied. “The result at Ames was significant; it might well have propelled us to the top tier. The media cannot change that.”
Though the media can, of course, change that since we get to determine who the top tier is. [emphasis added].
“It is hard for them to accept,” Paul said of his showing at Ames. “I had one interview scheduled for this morning, a national program, but they canceled. It is shocking to be told nobody wants you.”
But it seems the Lamestream Media weren’t the only ones showing contempt for Ron Paul and the will of the conservative voters of Ames, Iowa. Can you guess who else might want to keep Dr. Paul (and the Tea Party principles he stands for) out of the public eye? Simon continues,
There was a deliciously intriguing line in The Washington Post’s fine recap of Ames on Sunday. It said had Paul edged out Bachmann, “it would have hurt the credibility and future of the straw poll, a number of Republicans said.”
That’s right! If you guessed, “Cocktail Party GOP” as the other group most likely to shun a Tea Party candidate, you’re a winner!
So don’t blame the media. Here are Republicans, presumably Republican operatives, who said if one candidate wins, the contest is significant, but if another wins the contest is not credible.
Amazing. And disturbing.
Welcome to the Tea Party, Mr. Simon. Welcome to our world.
I can’t watch all the channels all the time, but I am finding it amusing how the LSM is falling all over themselves to prop up Mittens Romney’s campaign and avoid reporting the Tea Party landslide wherein the top two Tea Party candidates (Michelle Bachmann and Ron Paul) swept the Iowa Straw Poll.
Unfortunately, even Fox News’ Chris Wallace asked one of his guests this morning, “Wouldn’t you agree that Bachmann, Romney and Perry are now the frontrunners?”
There has been ONE major campaign event–the Iowa Straw Poll–so far. Bachman won with 28.55% of the vote. Ron Paul was in a virtual dead heat with her with 27.56%. Until yesterday, new media darling Rick Perry was a non-candidate, and got 3.65% of the vote. Because “it’s his turn,” and earning the nomination is beneath him, Mittens Romneycare couldn’t be be bothered to even show up (and finished in 7th place with a truly satisfying 3.36%).
And somehow Perry and Romneycare are frontrunners?
Another observation… Tim “Media-Declared Frontrunner Until This Morning When He Quit” Pawlenty got more coverage for dropping out of the race today than Ron Paul has received for coming in just 152 votes behind Bachmann, after spending just one-tenth as much on campaigning at the Straw Poll.
I don’t know about you but I am getting pretty tired of the LSM comparing the Tea Party to terrorists and jihadists and kidnappers. Now, in yesterday’s NYT’s, Maureen Dowd compares what happened during the debt debates in DC to a horror movie. “The gory, Gothic melodrama on the Potomac is a summer horror blockbuster — without the catharsis.” Very clever. I agree with her in that I think what is going on in Washington…and around the country…is like a horror movie but I completely flip who are the good guys and who are the bad guys. Ms. Dowd writes that “Just as horror films moved from niche to mainstream in the late-’70s, with successes like “Halloween” and “Alien,” the Tea Party moved from niche to mainstream.” She is correct in that the Tea Party is now mainstream…which means that a great number of Americans (especially American voters) identify with the ideas of the Tea Party. Ms. Dowd and the rest of the LSM (and many politicians) had better be careful who they are calling terrorists. These “terrorists” will be going to the ballot box next November.
I thought I’d join in the fun that Ms. Dowd is having comparing the debt debates to a horror flick but I want to turn around the characters to see things from an American citizens point of view. One of my all-time favorite horror movies is Dawn of the Dead. Ms. Dowd makes a little reference to zombies in her article when she says the Tea Party was ” like cannibals, eating their own party and leaders alive.” She, as a fair and balanced journalist (wink wink), should also consider another point of view. Perhaps it is the liberals in Washington and around the country, along with a great number of people who rely on the government for money, who are eating the American taxpayers alive. They are sucking our bank accounts dry. This is money that we have worked hard for and it is being given to help sustain those who feel that it is their right to be propped up by us.
So compare these pictures….
The resemblance is striking.
I think those that are calling us “terrorists” and “jihadists” and “monsters” should take a good look in the mirror. No one believes their fantasies anymore because the reality is slapping us all in the face. It’s Washington who is holding the American people hostage.
Their ransom request is higher taxes and bigger government.
LSM: Sarah Palin’s Bus Violates Federal Law; War Powers Act “Just A Suggestion” and Totally Okay for Obama Regime to “Skip”
MSNBC Leftist JournOList Martin Bashir is beside himself over private citizen Sarah Palin’s bus tour. He went on a 371-word, insulting, class-warfare-drenched rant in which he accuses Sarah Palin of violating Federal law because she has an American flag painted on the side of her private vehicle.
I am not making this up.
“…Sarah Palin specializes in checkbook journalism. That is, she only gives interviews to a network that pays her in excess of $1 million a year….The media are ever-present, catching her every handshake and every book signing…. And yet, even in her paid-for interview, she seems coy and almost confused about what she’s doing. “This is not a campaign bus,” she said on Fox News….In fact, the [American flag on the bus] could be in breach of a federal law because the United States Flag Code establishes important rules for the use and display of the stars and stripes, the flag of the United States. Under standards of respect and etiquette, it’s made clear that the flag of the United States should never be used for any advertising purpose whatsoever. Yet that’s precisely what Sarah Palin is doing. She’s using the flag of the United States for her own financial purposes. She drapes herself in the stars and stripes and makes millions of dollars in the process.”
The Act requires the president to get approval from Congress for any military action in a foreign country within 60 days after the uniformed troops hit the ground. If Congress doesn’t grant approval (as they did for George H.W. Bush in Kuwait and George W. Bush in Iraq and Afghanistan) then the Act requires that military action stop immediately.
The 60 days expired on May 27, 2011. The AP’s headline? “White House Skips Legal Deadline on Libya.”
The AP only needed 110 words to carry the water of Barack Hussein Obama, who is not a Muslim, because “everybody’s doing it” and “he’s kind of like a god” and “Congress didn’t, like, say they were mad about it.”
This little exchange took place this morning on MSNBC’s Morning Joe between “Strong like Bull” Mika Brzezinski and the very dashing and brilliant Niall Ferguson ( Professor of History at Harvard). Just watch this video…watch it several times….it will make your day. I so love Niall Ferguson and I so detest Mika ( I don’t care for Joe either). Mr. Ferguson made the crew of Morning Joe look like a bunch of uninformed idiots (which of course, they are). There is something about Mika that irritates me (aside from the fact that she LOVES Obama). She’s one of those aggressive know-it-all rabid liberal females. UGH! I love it when she gets put in her place….which is back under a rock. I bet they won’t have Mr. Ferguson on again anytime soon.
Go Niall Go!
HotAir has a very thought-provoking take on the demise of Keith Olbermann, almost lamenting his absence because he was just so unapologetically Leftist.
He didn’t try to hide either his bias or his intense stupidity.
Unlike, HotAir notes, Newsweek…which is also Leftist propaganda, but disguised as objective journalism…so rational people are often duped by its attacks on conservatives because they falsely believe Newsweek is unbiased.
With Olbermann, everyone knew who and what he was, and whom he was working for.
This is the same thing I say when conservatives get upset that people like Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, Barney Frank, James Clyburn, John Lewis, and other horrible Democrats remain in office. These people are caricatures of all the bad things the Left does…living, breathing, talking, and sometimes quacking political cartoons. There’s a reason SNL skits are often so spot-on when parodying these people, and it’s not because anyone even remotely talented or funny has worked at Saturday Night Live since before I was born. It’s just because the Left’s standard bearers are so ridiculous they are walking parodies of themselves and what insanity they believe in.
Olbermann is very much in this bunch, as is Chris Matthews, who is still on the air. It remains to be seen if Rachel Maddow will step up to the plate and become more crazy to fill the void Olbermann has left.
While it’s great seeing him fired because it was a firing long coming, strategically it indeed would have been better for the conservative cause if he had remained on the air, saying stupid things, and discrediting MSNBC through the next election. With him gone, the network can claim it cleaned house and is now unbiased, and many foolish people will believe that.
Which is a crying shame, because Olbermann might be gone, but the climate that bred and advanced him remains.