Stop Me Before I Lie again…

Political Cartoons by Chip Bok

Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. pledged Thursday to take concrete steps to address concerns that the Justice Department has overreached in its leak investigations and said officials would seek procedural and possibly legislative changes to protect journalists’ First Amendment rights. Holder’s commitment came at a private meeting with news executives after criticism that the Justice Department had infringed on the news media in several high-profile leak investigations. Participants said he told them officials would revise guidelines for issuing subpoenas to obtain reporters’ phone records. The 90-minute meeting was attended by a small group of journalists after several news organizations objected to the Justice Department’s insistence that it be held off the record. The participants, however, reached an agreement with the Justice Department under which they could describe what occurred during the meeting in general terms
Eric Holder pledged to take “concrete steps” to address the actions of Eric Holder — up to and (possibly) including backing legislative action that would curtail Eric Holder’s ability to abuse Eric Holder’s power.  What a guy. 

Reassuringly, Eric Holder has “completely endorsed” a principle that Eric Holder has already explicitly violated.  How many times has Eric Holder done so?  Eric Holder can’t quite say.  Click through to witness the pitiful spectacle of journalists quoting each other and vaguely discussing a meeting they’ve been barred from describing in any detail.  Finally, for good measure: A Justice Department spokeswoman declined to comment.
Perfect. (townhall)

Before he lied to Congress while under oath about what he knew about targeting reporters, he lied about Fast and Furious. As early as the New Black Panthers case, Eric Holder had a problem with the truth.

That the House Judiciary Committee is investigating whether Attorney General Eric Holder lied under oath during his May 15 testimony on Department of Justice (DOJ) surveillance of reporters comes as no surprise. People have forgotten about the New Black Panther case, perhaps the most clear-cut case of voter suppression and intimidation ever. On Election Day 2008, New Black Panther Party members in military garb were videotaped intimidating voters outside a Philadelphia polling place.

The slam-dunk prosecution of these thugs was dropped by Holder’s Justice Department. When asked why, Holder, on March 1, 2011, testified before the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, Science and Related Agencies that the “decisions made in the New Black Panther Party case were made by career attorneys in the department.”

Holder lied, for the decisions were made by political appointees. J. Christian Adams, a former career DOJ attorney in the Voting Rights Section, testified before the U.S. Civil Rights Commission that it was Associate Attorney General Thomas Perrelli, an Obama political appointee, who overruled a unanimous recommendation for prosecution by Adams and his associates.

Documents obtained by Judicial Watch and a ruling by Judge Reggie B. Walton of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia in response to a suit brought by the group show that “political appointees within DOJ were conferring about the status and resolution of the New Black Panther Party case in the days preceding the DOJ’s dismissal of claims in that case.”

Fast forward to Fast and Furious, the Obama administration’s program to “walk” guns across the border and into the hands of Mexican drug cartels in furtherance of its gun control agenda.

“When did you first know about the program officially I believe called Fast and Furious? To the best of your knowledge, what date?” House Oversight Committee Chairman Darrell Issa asked Holder in sworn testimony on May 3, 2011. “I’m not sure of the exact date, but I probably heard about Fast and Furious for the first time over the last few weeks,” was Holder’s response.

Holder lied: A July 2010 memo shows Michael Walther, head of the National Drug Intelligence Center, told Holder that straw buyers in Fast and Furious “are responsible for the purchase of 1,500 firearms that were then supplied to the Mexican drug trafficking cartels.”

House Judiciary Committee Chairman Lamar Smith, R-Texas, said other documents indicate Holder began receiving weekly briefings on the program from the National Drug Intelligence Center on or before that date.

In an exchange with Sen. Pat Leahy on Nov. 8, 2011, Holder admitted his May 3 testimony was inaccurate when he said he knew about Fast and Furious for a “few weeks.” He later changed that to a “couple months.”

But the memo from Walther referring to Fast and Furious in detail was sent directly to Holder on July 5, 2010 — not a “couple months” before he testified in May.

No surprise then on May 15, 2013, before the House Judiciary Committee, Holder lied when he said: “In regard to potential prosecution of the press for the disclosure of material, this is not something I’ve been involved in, heard of, or would think would be wise policy.”

He personally signed off on James Rosen’s warrant. Holder’s defenders say the statement is technically correct because he never meant to prosecute Rosen, only to find the leaker. If so, then he lied to a federal judge.

Similarly, Holder’s testimony to the House Judiciary Committee that he had recused himself from the Associated Press leak investigation that led to the blanket seizure of call records is not backed up by a formal recusal letter, which is required under such circumstances.

So we have at least four counts of lying to Congress by the chief law enforcement officer of the United States.

When did the lies begin? Looks like right after he took the oath of his office. (IBD)

Better Question: When and if will they ever stop? And can he do anything else but lie??
Political Cartoons by Steve Breen
Political Cartoons by Bob Gorrell
Political Cartoons by Steve Kelley

A White Out

MSDNC: Romney Only Comfortable Around ‘White Folks’

‘White folks who are very much relaxed in their own company’

But don’t worry, they are “journalists”! 🙂

Sharpton Blames Holder Contempt Charge On Racism

As I marched this past Sunday with tens of thousands in New York in opposition to the abhorrent practice of stop & frisk,’ (for marijuana possession because after all a Big Gulp and Salt is MUCH worse!) I couldn’t help but think of our attorney general. Tattered down and publicly humiliated, AG Holder has been mishandled just like the young Black and Latino men (and women) who are demonized on our streets everyday. Chris Matthews of Hardball on MSNBC concurred: AG Holder is being profiled, stopped and searched.

The highest officer of law and order in this nation has been ridiculed, scapegoated and handled as some sort of criminal throughout this ‘investigation.’

Four words for you Al: Valerie Plaime — Dick Cheney.

And this is far worse than that. But Holders a Liberal AND Black so he supposed to be beyond questioning.

Just because he admits to LYING to Congress means it’s racist to pursue the issue now. Sigh…

And what do you know: Good old reliable Debbie Wasserman Schultz was lying too: http://www.politifact.com/wisconsin/statements/2012/jun/20/debbie-wasserman-schultz/billionaire-koch-brothers-gave-8-million-wisconsin/

And Obama was going ape on Bush over Executive Privilege now he’s deep in it and Liberals don’t care, least of all him.

Fascinating. 🙂

But back to “racism” from the “enlightened” ones:

The University of Minnesota Duluth is one of 15 partners in the 'Un-Fair' Campaign which wants white people to understand the concept of 'white privilege' and how that affects their perceptions of race

The University of Minnesota – Duluth (UMD) is now sponsoring an ad-campaign designed to achieve “racial justice” by raising awareness of “white privilege.”

The project disseminates its message, that “society was setup for us [whites]” and as such is “unfair,” through an aggressive campaign of online videos, billboards, and lectures. The ads feature a number of Caucasians confessing their guilt for the supposed “privilege” that comes along with their fair features.

The self-titled Un-Fair Campaign, is sponsored and supported by the University of Minnesota – Duluth, along with several liberal organizations including the NAACP, YWCA, and The League of Woman Voters.

“You give me better jobs, better pay, better treatment, and a better chance – all because of the color of my skin,” reads one poster that features a close shot of a Caucasian male.

The Un-Fair campaign also held a series of lectures and events on campus last semester. One included a presentation by Tim Wise, author of Dear White America. In his book, Wise confesses a “longstanding fantasy” where he turns to a man with a “God Bless the USA” button and asks him, “why can’t you just get over it?”

These lectures were publicly endorsed by university Chancellor Lendley Black. Black sent a message to the campus community in April describing his effort to “create an inclusive campus climate for all” through providing “support and… leadership to the Un-Fair Campaign.”

Call the school and voice your opinion at (218) 726-8996 or send an e-mail to chan@d.umn.edu. Tell them Campus Reform sent you. 🙂

Because after all, if you’re white you were born a racist and you need to repent for your original sin!!!

***********

Retiring congressman Gary Ackerman, a Democrat from New York, reflects on his time in Congress. 

“Congressman Ackerman, you’ve been here 30 years. Can you define comity as it existed when you arrived versus how it exists now?,” Bloomberg Businessweek asks.

Ackerman responds: ” Your premise is that comity exists now. It may not be entirely accurate. It used to be you had real friends on the other side of the aisle. It’s not like that anymore. Society has changed. The public is to blame as well. I think the people have gotten dumber. I don’t know that I would’ve said that out loud pre-my announcement that I was going to be leaving. [Laughter] But I think that’s true. I mean everything has changed. The media has changed. We now give broadcast licenses to philosophies instead of people. People get confused and think there is no difference between news and entertainment. People who project themselves as journalists on television don’t know the first thing about journalism. They are just there stirring up a hockey game.”

I wonder if they attended the University of Minnesota?

A British high school called police to remove a star pupil who is so “obsessed” with revising that he refused to leave the library.

Revision is British for studying.

Jamie Gagliardi, 18, was ejected from Ifield Community College in southern England, after refusing to leave the library, the Crawley News reported.

The school accused Gagliardi, who is predicted to be an A-grade student, of being “obsessed” with after-school tuition and said that it called the police because the pupil was causing a “nuisance.”

Gagliardi, who was forced to call his mother to pick him up, said, “I have been punished for wanting to do well. I am a hard-working and dedicated student, and this could have such an impact on my future.”

Maybe he should go to the University of Minnesota and they’ll kill that want  or need for study.

After it’s a white’s fault and when you can get a job because you’re actually a moron then that’s the rich people’s fault so you need government to come in and save your sorry ass. 🙂

But if you’re white and rich, it’s all your fault! 🙂

Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

 

Fast & Furious–Fascinating: http://townhall.com/video/michelle-malkin-confronts-liberal-over-fast-and-furious

There is implications the Dems are attempting to tie former Bush administration officials to “fast and furious.” Trust me Obama would not invoke Executive privilege to protect Bush officials. (Rhonda Deniston)

And Bush is White. So it must be his fault! 🙂

Political Cartoons by Jerry Holbert

Political Cartoons by Robert Ariail

Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel
Political Cartoons by Steve Kelley

Political Cartoons by Glenn McCoy
Political Cartoons by Nate Beeler

Moving Forwards Backwards

Meet the Roberts electric car. Built in 1896, it gets a solid 40 miles to the charge — exactly the mileage Chevrolet advertises for the Volt, the highly touted $31,645 electric car General Motors CEO Dan Akerson called “not a step forward, but a leap forward.”

As the New York Times reported September 5, “For General Motors and the Obama administration, the new Chevrolet Volt plug-in hybrid represents the automotive future, the culmination of decades of high-tech research financed partly with federal dollars.”

Way to Go Greenies. Next thing you know, we’ll get a Steam Powered Car!!

*********************

According to the British Sunday Times, sources have said President Obama asked Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to hold off on bombing Iran’s nuclear facilities until after the November 2012 election.According to the British Sunday Times, sources have said President Obama asked Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to hold off on bombing Iran’s nuclear facilities until after the November 2012 election.

Well, at least he knows what’s really important… HIM! 🙂

**************************

“You’ve got to hand it to Democratic strategists. Who would have thought six months ago that in the lead up to perhaps the most important presidential election of our time, the hottest political topic in the country would not be the weak economy, high unemployment, the huge national debt, record gas prices, or turmoil in the Middle East. Instead it’s Women’s Rights, or at least that’s what the Democratic party is calling it while miraculously managing to keep a straight face.

“A term that was once used in conjunction with women’s suffrage and the right to vote is suddenly synonymous in the modern day with free contraceptives at the expense of others. Gone are the likes of true icons like Susan B. Anthony. Now we have Sandra Fluke and her heroic crusade to mandate that her sexual lifestyle choices be subsidized. How proud the Democratic party must feel right now to have successfully revitalized the civil rights movement in the 21st century by equating it with luxury entitlement. The media must feel pretty good too. They’ve actually been able to substantiate this ridiculous narrative to the American public… or at least a targeted voting block within the American public.

“The Republicans’ War on Women – that’s the poll-tested talking point coming out of Debbie Wasserman Schultz and the DNC these days. Despite the absurdity and insulting nature of the claim, the mantra sure is getting a lot of attention. It’s also proving to be an effective weapon – one of several weapons from a year-long arsenal of distractions designed to keep the Republican party off step, off topic, and constantly on the defensive at a time when President Obama is wrapping up what is surely the most dismal presidential term of my lifetime.” (allapundit)

Mark Steyn: All of us are born with the unalienable right to life, liberty, and a lifetime supply of premium ribbed silky-smooth ultrasensitive spermicidal lubricant condoms. No taxation without rubberization, as the Minutemen said. The shot heard round the world, and all that. 🙂

******************

The U.S. economy added 227,000 jobs in February vs. expectations for 206,000, continuing a recent trend of decent hiring activity. The unemployment rate held at 8.3%.

And it has been OVER 8% since February 2009!

But America remains mired in the longest jobs recession since the Great Depression. It’s been 49 months since the U.S. hit peak employment in January 2008. And with nonfarm payrolls still 5.33 million below their old high, the jobs slump will continue for several more years.

The previous jobs recession record — 47 months — came during and after the comparatively mild 2001 recession, which saw unemployment climb to only 6.3%. The average job recovery time since 1980 is 29 months, not including the current slump.

The labor market won’t truly return to health until some 10 million positions are created to rehire all those who lost their jobs and to absorb new workers.

The longest jobs recession in decades coincides, not coincidentally, with the longest stretch of anemic economic performance on record.

U.S. gross domestic profit hasn’t risen 4% or more in any quarter since the first quarter of 2006. That’s by far the longest such stretch on record going back to 1950. The only other sizable sub-par stretch was a three-year span from late 2000 to mid-2003 during the prior recession and sluggish recovery.

The current expansion, which began in mid-2009, is particularly disappointing, given the deep recession that preceded it. The best growth was a three-quarter run of 3.8%-3.9% gains.

After the severe 1981-82 recession, the U.S. economy enjoyed a five-quarter stretch of 7% or more — following a 5.1% annualized gain.

The U.S. economy is up just 6.2% above the level at the end of the recession vs. 14.9% in the 10 quarters after the 1981-82 slump.

President Obama may take hope that the U.S. economy has picked up from near-stall speed to a modest pace in recent months. But after the mild 1990-1991 downturn, the U.S. economy rose tepidly for a few quarters before growing more than 4% in every quarter of 1992. That still wasn’t enough to keep the first President Bush from losing to Bill Clinton.

And nobody is predicting 4% growth in 2012. (IBD)

Bernard Goldberg: For years, journalists have bristled at allegations of liberal bias in the news. “If you think we have a bias,” some of them would say, “that only proves one thing: that you’re the one with the bias.”

When my book “Bias” came out at the end of 2001 — despite a surprisingly good review in the New York Times — so-called mainstream reporters generally denounced it. “Liberal bias?” they asked incredulously. “What liberal bias?”

A few even called me a “traitor” for supposedly turning on my colleagues, which is kind of funny since these are people who won’t call a real traitor … a traitor.

Well, now we have Chuck Todd, political director and chief White House correspondent at NBC News, breaking ranks (sort of) with his fellow journalists.

In an interview with Politico, Todd says, “To me, the ideological bias in the media really hasn’t been there in a long time. But what is there that people mistake for ideological bias is geographic bias. It’s seeing everything through the lens of New York and Washington.”

Not really, but it’s good that Chuck Todd at least seems to be acknowledging that there was, once upon a time, an ideological bias in the mainstream media. To say it “hasn’t been there in a long time,” acknowledges that it was there, once. This is something a lot of journalists would never admit.

To Todd, bias in the news simply stems from too many elite journalists living in too few places — Manhattan and D.C. But what he doesn’t quite seem to understand is that geography influences culture and culture influences ideology.

Inside The Bubble

People on the Upper West Side of Manhattan don’t see ObamaCare, for example, the same way people in Alabama see it. That’s not because of geography. It’s because of ideology. Or to put it another way, there are a lot more liberals on the Upper West Side than there are in Montgomery.

Todd is hard on political journalists, but only up to a point, and makes sure we understand that they’re not slanting the news in favor of liberals because they themselves are liberals. The reason, he says, has a lot more to do with zip codes than party affiliations.

“I think sometimes there are too many people who cover politics that don’t understand the grass roots of the Republican Party,” he correctly tells Politico.

And why don’t they understand? Because they cover America from a safe distance, embedded in the nation’s media capitals — Washington and New York.

“Part of what animates them (political journalists) is if (Middle Americans are) pushing it, I’m against it. But also that we don’t understand their day-to-day lives. That we don’t respect the fact that they go to church twice a week. That when we look down our noses upon Wal-Mart, they see it as the only place to shop.”

Let’s see if I have this right: The sophisticates in Manhattan and Georgetown don’t like anything that the hayseeds who live in Middle America like. If the unwashed in Flyover Country are for it, the elites in New York and D.C. are against it.

That, Chuck, is not geographical bias. It’s the same old bias conservatives have complained about for years. It’s a bias based on the reporter’s ideology, the journalist’s liberal ideology.

By blaming it all on geography, Chuck Todd, intentionally or not, tries to take the edge off the problem. If it’s only geographical, it speaks only to a blind spot. It says, “Hey, we live in a bubble, that’s why we’re biased. And it has nothing to do with our politics.”

Yes, they do live in a bubble, but make no mistake: Inside that bubble, journalists don’t simply share the same geography — they share the same ideology. They’re almost all liberals inside the bubble who share the same values and believe those values are moderate, mainstream and reasonable while conservative values are extreme and dangerous.

In Love With Obama

“Too many people mistake ideological bias for what really is a matter of geography,” is how he ends his interview with Politico.

Sorry, Chuck, but you’re the one who is making a mistake. If almost all the media elites live in Washington and New York and are liberal, is the problem that they live in Washington and New York or that they’re liberal? If there were more conservatives in the ranks of elite journalists — editors, producers, anchors — it wouldn’t matter if they all lived on the same block.

But let’s give Chuck Todd some credit for even bringing up the subject of bias in the news. Halley’s comet flashing across the sky over the USA is a more commonplace event than a mainstream reporter admitting any kind of bias.

Still, it’s too bad, since he’s in charge of political coverage at NBC News, that Todd forgot to tell Politico about how supposedly objective journalists fell madly in love with Barack Obama four years ago and decided they would not settle for being eyewitnesses to history. The election was too important.

This time, they felt, they had to they help shape history. So they put on their short skirts to go along with their pompoms and shamelessly became cheerleaders for Mr. Obama — and will probably do it again once the Republicans pick their nominee. That kind of journalistic bias has very little to do with geography and whole bunch to do with ideology.

So, one cheer for Chuck.

A Bronx one, if you please 🙂

Political Cartoons by Glenn Foden
Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel

Political Cartoons by Ken Catalino

Political Cartoons by Lisa Benson

15 Questions

During the practically endless series of Republican debates, we have heard almost every question imaginable asked to Republican candidates – if by every question imaginable, you mean horribly slanted, often irrelevant questions designed to make them look bad and help Obama. We’ve heard questions about contraceptives, religion, Newt’s angry ex-wife, Gardasil, etc., etc., etc. So, what would happen if the mainstream media treated Barack Obama the exact same way that they treat Republicans? The questions might sound a little something like this.

1) Numerous Mexican citizens and an American citizen have been killed with weapons knowingly provided to criminals by our own government during Operation Fast and Furious. If Eric Holder was aware that was going on, do you think he should step down as Attorney General? Were you aware that was going on and if so, shouldn’t you resign?

2) In 2010 you said Solyndra, which gave your campaign a lot of money, was “leading the way toward a brighter and more prosperous future.” Today, Solyndra is bankrupt and the taxpayers lost $500 million on loans that your administration was well aware might never be paid off when you made them. What do you say to people who say this is evidence of corruption in your administration?

3) Unions invested a lot of time and money in helping to get you elected. In return, they gained majority control of Chrysler, the taxpayers lost 14 billion dollars on General Motors, and General Motors received a special 45 billion dollar tax break. What do you say to people who view this as corruption on a scale never before seen in American history?

4) Through dubious means, you and your allies in Congress managed to push through an incredibly unpopular health care bill that helped lead to the worst election night for the Democratic Party in 50 years. Since the bill has passed, many of your claims about the bill have proven to be untrue. For example, we now know the bill won’t lower costs and despite your assurances to the contrary, big companies like McDonald’s say they may drop health care because of the health care reform. Since the American people have rejected your health care reform and it doesn’t do what you said it would, shouldn’t you work with the Republicans to repeal it?

5) When you took office, gas was $1.79 per gallon. Since then, you’ve demonized the oil industry, dramatically slowed offshore drilling, blocked ANWR, and killed the Keystone Pipeline. Now, gas is $3.34 per gallon. How much higher do you anticipate driving gas prices?

6) Occupy Wall Street has been protesting against Wall Street and the richest 1 percent in America. You are in the top 1 percent of income earners in America and you have collected more cash from Wall Street than any other President in history. So, aren’t you exactly the sort of politician that Occupy Wall Street wants to get rid of?

7) How do you decide which foreign leaders to submissively bow towards and why do you think that’s appropriate for an American President?

8) If they could, don’t you think the Nobel Committee would take back the Nobel Peace Prize that you were awarded?

9) You made bipartisanship one of the central themes of your campaign in 2008. Yet, you’ve worked to push bills through Congress with almost no Republican support, spent much less time negotiating with Congress than George Bush, and you’ve said things like, “But, I don’t want the folks who created the mess to do a lot of talking. I want them to get out of the way so we can clean up the mess. I don’t mind cleaning up after them, but don’t do a lot of talking.” Why did you decide to break your campaign promise to pursue bipartisanship?

10) America lost its AAA credit rating for the first time under your watch. What do you think you should have done differently to have prevented that historic failure?

11) You cut more than 500 billion dollars out of Medicare to fund your wildly unpopular health care reform bill. Given that Medicare is running in the red already, don’t you think it’s irresponsible to cut money out of one entitlement program, that millions of seniors depend on — to put it into a risky new entitlement program?

12) Back in July, you said, “Nobody’s looking to raise taxes right now. We’re talking about potentially 2013 and the out years.” Since you plan to raise taxes if you’re elected and you’ve had kind words for a value added tax, shouldn’t every American expect a tax increase if you’re reelected?

13) Why should the American people reelect you when your 10 year budget saddles America with more debt than all previous Presidents combined?

14) Your stimulus bill cost more in real dollars than the moon landing and the interstate highway system combined. What do we have to show for all of that money spent?

15) Members of your administration promised that the trillion dollar stimulus would keep unemployment under 8 percent. Instead, we’ve had 35+ months of 8% and above unemployment. Doesn’t that mean we wasted a trillion dollars on nothing? (John Hawkins)

It’s fun to think what could have been if we had Journalists instead of Left Wing Propagandists masquerading as “journalists”.

So have a supply of industrial barf bags if yo decide to watch Obama’s “soaring” Campaign Bull shit speech tonight then the fawning and slobbering by the Liberal Media before and after.

I will be watching “Chopped” on the Food network.

 

The Media Machine

More words of wisdom from Ms. Food Police Herself, Michelle Obama:

American children need to “get their palates adjusted” so they will begin eating properly.

And she’s just the Government Mommy to do it!

Mrs. Obama also said that children in “underserved communities” become obese because they “aren’t growing up with vegetables because there are no grocery stores.”

Has this hit the stupidly condescending level yet?

First Lady Michelle Obama said that “arugula and steak” was her “favorite” meal.

Michael Ramirez Cartoon

Four years ago, the ABC, CBS and NBC morning shows celebrated the “rock star” Democrats running to replace George W. Bush, and no candidate set journalists’ pulses racing faster than Barack Obama. Now, after three years of high unemployment, trillion dollar deficits and an onerous new health care law, how are those newscasts covering Obama’s re-election campaign and the candidates vying to replace him?

To find out, Media Research Center analysts examined all 723 campaign segments which aired on the three broadcast network weekday morning programs from January 1 to October 31, 2011, using the same methodology we employed to study campaign coverage on those same programs for the same time period in 2007.

Four years ago, the network coverage promoted the Democratic candidates and cast their strong liberal views as mainstream. This year, our study finds the networks are disparaging the Republican candidates and casting them as ideological extremists:
Labeling:

– This year, network reporters have employed 49 “conservative” labels to describe the Republican candidates, compared with only one “liberal” label for President Obama.

– Four years ago, when Obama was a relatively unknown candidate, the morning shows also provided just a single “liberal” label to describe his ideology, and never once labeled Hillary Clinton, John Edwards or the other Democrats as “liberal.”   
Agenda:

– By a 4-to-1 margin, ABC, CBS and NBC morning show hosts have employed an adversarial liberal agenda when questioning this year’s Republican candidates. But those same hosts’ questions for President Obama leaned in his direction, with mostly liberal-themed questions.

And the Republicans do themselves no favors having liberals like these “journalists” moderating their debates so they can throw “gotcha” questions and condescending lobs.

– Four years ago, questions for the Democratic candidates tilted by more than two-to-one to the left, a friendly agenda.

Tone:

– In 2007, Democratic candidates were regularly tossed softball questions. This year’s interviews with Republicans have been much more caustic, with few chances for the candidates to project a warm and fuzzy image.

– Despite the poor economy and low approval ratings, the morning shows continue to treat Barack Obama as more of a celebrity than a politician, airing positive feature stories about the President and his family — a gift not bestowed on the conservative Republican candidates.

During the 2008 campaign, the network morning shows acted as cheerleaders for the Democratic field. This time around, they are providing far more hostile coverage of the various Republicans who are running, while treating Obama’s re-election campaign to the same personality-driven coverage that was so helpful to the then-Illinois Senator four years ago.

If the real decisions in our democracy are to be in the hands of voters, then the news media owe viewers a fair and unbiased look at the candidates in both parties. That means asking the candidates questions that reflect the concerns of both sides — liberals and conservatives alike. And the syrupy coverage awarded year after year to the Democrats’ celebrity candidates in no way matches the pretense of journalists holding both sides equally accountable, without fear or favor.

As might be expected, given the lack of a contest for the Democratic nomination, most of the segments were about the Republican nomination process. Yet of the approximately 60 percent of items that mainly focused on just one candidate, there were more than three times as many segments about President Barack Obama’s re-election campaign (129) than about any individual Republican candidates. (This tally only includes stories that discuss Obama as a candidate, excluding items that dealt with him strictly as President.)

Bill Maher: “You’ve got to feel very bad for Mitt Romney,” Maher observed. “I mean, he has been led so far by Trump, then Bachmann, then Perry, then Cain.” “He hangs in there!” exclaimed Stephanopoulos. “He’s everyone’s second choice.” “I’m rooting for him. Look, because in a country with two political parties, the Republican can always win. I mean — at least he eats with a knife and fork! I mean — he is all that stands between us and the rise of the apes.

Republicans are apes. 🙂

“He’s today the political equivalent of a rock star,” then-CBS correspondent Gloria Borger trumpeted on the January 17, 2007 Early Show. The next day, NBC’s Matt Lauer agreed: “He’s got rock star buzz around him.”

On Oct 31st the Herman Cain “scandal” broke so Herman has gotten much more talk, all of it bad. The piling on has been non-stop.

Hitting Republicans With a Liberal Agenda: As might be expected, most of the questions posed to the Republican candidates had to do with campaign strategy and personal controversies. But our analysts counted 104 “ideological questions” — policy-based questions that incorporated either a liberal or conservative premise.

    Of those, the vast majority (85, or 82%) reflected a liberal policy agenda, vs. just 19 (18%) that highlighted the concerns of conservative voters. Thus, instead of functioning as a surrogate for the Republican rank-and-file voter who probably won’t get a chance to question a candidate, TV journalists used their time with the candidates to push a standard liberal agenda.
    A central policy issue for many of these interviews was the economy and the growing national debt, and network hosts consistently pressed the candidates for their reluctance to agree on the need for a tax increase. On the April 13 Today, for example, co-host Matt Lauer hit Bachmann: “Is raising taxes on the table?” before employing liberal rhetoric: “Why shouldn’t the burden be equally shared? Why shouldn’t we put some of that burden on the wealthy and corporations?”

  And in September, Hill hit Newt Gingrich for backing the Tea Party: “There’s a feeling by some folks that this very small group of people is starting to control the conversation. Do there need to be more voices at the table, in general, at this point?”

    A month later, she went after the ex-Speaker again, this time for criticizing the left-wing “Occupy Wall Street” protests: “You have had some pretty outspoken words, though, for the folks behind Occupy Wall Street, that you don’t think this is a great move, that you don’t really see what their point is. Yet, a number of Americans say they’re behind it.”

They are earnestly Liberal aren’t they. 🙂

So next time you hear that the Liberal media isn’t biased, you can laugh cynically just like I do.

Political Cartoons by Eric Allie

 

Persistance

I was woken up in the middle of the night think about something that Morgan Gendel (Star Trek: TNG’s “Inner Light”) said during his talk at Phoenix Comic Con today.

Persistance.

That’s what got him the job.

Sure he had to please the masses of people who worked for the show, but he pitched this now classic episode to the same people 5 times.

And it got me to thinking about the Republicans.

Those scared little boys who just want to be liked.

The one that will be eaten alive by a ravenous pack of Liberal “journalists”.

The idea that they will try and play to the middle so much that they will nominate a RINO (Republican in Name Only) again like Sen. McCain as their nominee again.

Then they will lose. The country will lose and history will lose. Time itself will lose. Humanity will lose.

The person who beats Obama will have to look into the teeth of the ravenous plague of piranhas and persist.

They will have to look the very face of Fear and Death in the face.

They will have to be willing to be atomized by the most ravenous levels of hatred, fear and bile.

Because, who every runs against the GOD of the Liberal Left will have endure all of these things and persist.

The Left and The Media are not our friends. They are a remorseless pack of wild raptors hunting in packs to rip apart any potential prey that gets in their way.

That is quite a daunting challenge.

But if it’s not well met and defeated, The Dark Side Wins.

You think they are insufferably arrogant now, just wait until even after all the shit they have piled on and still they win in November 2012 there will be no stopping them or their egos.

Orwell’s Nightmare will be an optimistic vision when these clowns are down with you.

So, if you’re a Conservative, A Libertarian, or just a Moderate who does not want to see The Darkness win you must be willing to start the very face of Fear and Death in the Face and WIN.

A RINO will be shredded not only by the Liberals and Their Liberal Media Machine, but by me, and people like me, your humble Tea Party Conservative.

You don’t have us in the bag.

Remember that.

You put up a RINO, a “safe” candidate that will have “middle of the road” appeal and you will lose!

Period. End of story. End of Country.

You want to be “safe” in your political games and elitism. You’ll lose.

But it is incumbent on us, the humble “average voter” to make sure that no RINO is put forth also.

We have our part to play and we have our own battle to win.

We must persist also.

We must get what WE WANT, not what Washington thinks we want. Or what some over-priced political consultants thinks will get those “20% in the middle”.

We must Survive the coming Armageddon that will reign down upon us by the hoardes of Hell from the Left and we must persist.

Or else, all hope is truly lost.

So get ready for battle.

It won’t be safe, it won’t be kind.

But it is a battle that must be fought and it must be won.

For your sake, for you kids sake for your grandkids and kids not yet borns’ sake.

Because even if we win, the Forces of Hell will just regroup and come again and again and again and we must fight them until THEY give up not when we declare victory.

Otherwise, it’s over, turn out the lights, and that shining beacon upon the hill that has been America will be forever extinguished.

Simple.

If you are going through hell, keep going. — Winston Churchill

As the Congressional Republicans have attempted to pass a budget that tackles our pending deficit and Medicare crises, Democrats have become quite adept at shooting down budgets while not bothering to propose any practical solutions of their own (today would be day 758, I believe?). It is understandable, though, that they just do not have the time to worry about a federal budget, since they are so darn busy coddling the general welfare. The latest legislation? Forget the budget; we need even more federal standards for sunscreen lotion labels! The Hill has the story:

“As families prepare for Memorial Day festivities, and plan outings this summer, most will be outdoors without adequate sun protection, even if they use sunscreen,” Sen. Jack Reed (D-R.I.), the sponsor, said this week. “This is because there are currently no rules that sunscreen makers must follow when making claims about the level of protection their products provide.”

The bill, S. 1064, would require the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to finalize its 2007 proposal mandating that sunscreen labels disclose the extent to which the product protects against ultraviolet rays known as UVA rays. UVA rays can penetrate the skin more deeply than UVB rays, but currently, sunscreen labels are not required to tell consumers how they protect against UVA rays.

Aside from Reed, the bill is sponsored by several Democratic heavy-hitters, including Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman John Kerry (D-Mass.), Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) and Rules and Administration Committee Chairman Charles Schumer (D-NY). First-term Sen. Al Franken (D-Minn.) is also a sponsor.

According to Reed, forcing the application of the FDA proposal would require labels to “disclose the level of UVA protection in a standard format that appears near the sun protection factor rating, and ensure that the SPF rating actually corresponds to a product’s protection against UVB rays.”

The bill would require the proposed FDA rule to take effect within 180 days after it became law.

“I look forward to a summer when Americans can finally feel protected from the sun’s harmful rays,” Reed said.

Well, what a relief that Senator Jack Reed is looking out for me, because otherwise, I would have had no way of knowing about the subtle differences in the sun blockage provided between SPF 75 and SPF 85 (hint: there are none), and never mind the numerous studies that suggest that sunscreen may actually accelerate cancer. Good grief! While this legislation was originally proposed in 2007, this is just a taste of what will happen if the looming menace of Obamacare stays on schedule: since I know that I will not have to feel the full costs of getting any skin cancer spots surgically removed, I have less of an incentive to limit my sun exposure. I know that “society” will pay for it, so I will not take conscious action to lessen my future demand for health care, and the system will become overburdened and expensive. Hence, it becomes the federal government’s job to make decisions about my welfare for me and further encumber the mind-blowing bureaucracy that rules our lives. But hey, even if I cannot afford to buy sunscreen because of federal spending, higher taxes, and a wracked economy, at least I will be able to understand the labels. (Erika Johnsen)

It’s your choice. You cannot do this because it will be easy, and neither can the Republicans.

It will not be.

The very mouth of Hell and Damnation will open upon any who dare to challenge the might and the righteousness of The Holy Left.

Thems just the facts,ma’am.

Deal with it.

And then Persist.

Political Cartoons by Steve Breen

Political Cartoons by Lisa Benson

Political Cartoons by Nate Beeler