The Kind of Thing That Liberal Freeloaders Can Appreciate

A FREE RIDE.

To all the liberals who promised to leave if Trump was elected, who are the same liberals who threatened to leave if George W. Bush was elected, it’s time that you actually kept your word. Make America Great Again by LEAVING.

trump-1-on-standby

Advertisements

The Top 50 Liberal Media Bias Examples

I really find it amusing, and at the same time frustrating, when liberals try to deny a liberal media bias. They ignore the overwhelming pro-liberal/anti-conservative reporting from the mainstream media outlets, while continually whining about the lone conservative “mainstream” media outlet, that being Fox News. They act as if there were a thousand Fox News type outlets, and that the liberal outlets were the minority. Don’t you just love Alinsky tactics?

//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

The Top 50 Liberal Media Bias Examples

December 10, 2011 by Warner Todd Huston

Examples of Liberal Media Bias

Let’s face it, liberal media bias has been around since there have been liberals to do the “reporting” of the news. But this fact should surprise no one. After all, the news media has always been filled with bias of one type or another. In fact, there was a time when American customers of the news knew exactly which newspapers sported which point of view. It was taken for granted that one newspaper supported one side and another newspaper a different side.

But in the late 1950s and early 1960s that all changed. Suddenly the folks in the news media began to present themselves as unbiased pursuers of “the truth.” Gone was the out-in-front bias and instead the media cloaked itself in a new air of detachment, a new just-the-facts mien.

This new era in media conceit coincided with the advent of a liberal mindset that took on the weight of the world, a new era in which liberals felt that their ideals rose above God, tradition and country.

Suddenly a journalist’s work was divorced from the trade in local news and became a profession increasingly assuming a national and ideological agenda, one fueled by journalism schools and professors that began to disgorge university trained “journalists” with a left-wing agenda. These people then went forth to replace the grizzled local reporters that were wedded to their local political culture. This new wave of “journalists” did not want to report what was going on in their local news as much as they wanted to “save the world.”

In pursuit of that left-wing national agenda — if not a leftist world agenda — “reporters” began to spin all news stories, from the most mundane stories to the hottest national news, toward a left-wing agenda. These “journalists” slipped in bias in every way they could to push the leftist’s meme.

For decades this left-wing agenda drove the coverage of the news. Then in the 1980s talk radio came and conservative talkers began to point out this obvious bias. Even so the bias continued unabated.

Only one thing has begun to turn the tide — or at least succeed in educating news consumers — against liberal media bias. Since the advent of the New Media, Internet forums, blogs, podcasts, and on-line news sources, what I call the Old Media has had a much tougher time getting away with the bias that has plagued its work since the 1960s.

But that won’t stop them from trying!

Certainly any list will be somewhat subjective, and some may quibble with what is and is not on the list. But following is, if not the top 50 examples of media bias, 50 egregious and well-known examples of it.

So, without further ado, and in no particular order except a loose historical timeline, here are some of the top 50 examples of liberal media bias.

1) Better Red Than Informed: Probably the single worst example of liberal media bias is the media’s steadfast refusal to accurately report the monstrous evils of the Soviet Union — even still to this day. It didn’t matter how many millions of Soviet citizens that Joseph Stalin and his successors murdered, it didn’t matter how evil the Soviet Union was, the liberal media was not going to report about it. The media even awarded itself a Pulitzer Prize through the lies of one Walter Duranty a New York Times columnist that was a shill for the murderous Soviet Union.

2). Castro’s Cheerleaders: The Soviets weren’t the only communists that America’s liberal media establishment has for years worked to shore up. Cuba’s Fidel Castro was also a communist dear to the hearts of the Old Media establishment. Never an unkind word for dear leader.

Continue reading

I Told You So – Yes I Did

Here is some very astute political analysis of the first 6 months of O-Bow-ma’s undocumented presidency. He is indeed a train wreck in the making for America. Unfortunately, just like a wounded animal, he is very dangerous and likely to do much damage before he is “contained.”


http://www.galganov.com/editorials.asp?ID=1147

I Told You So – Yes I Did

By: Howard Galganov
Thursday, July 23, 2009

When Obama won the Presidency with the help of the LEFTIST Media, Hollywood and Entertainment Liberals, Ethnic Socialists (ACORN), Stupid Non-Business Professionals and Bush Haters, I wrote:

It won’t take 6 months until the people figure this guy out and realize how horrible a mistake they’ve made. And when they come to that realization, the damage to the United States of America will be so great, that it will take a generation or more to repair – IF EVER.

The IDIOTS who not only voted for the Messiah, but also worked their sorry asses-off to promote his Lordship, are now left holding the bag.

Here are two things they will NEVER do:

  • 1 – They will NEVER admit to making a blunder out of all proportion by electing a snake-oil salesman with no positive social history or management experience of any kind.
  • 2 – They will NEVER take responsibility for the curse they’ve imposed upon the immediate and long-term future of their country.

In essence, the people responsible for putting this horror-show in power are in themselves responsible for every cataclysmic decision he makes and the consequences thereof.

In just 6 (SIX) months, the Messiah’s polls are showing the following:

  • On Healthcare Reform – He’s going under for the third time with polling well under 50%, even within his own Party.
  • Even though he might be able to muscle a Healthcare Reform Bill by using Chicago BULLY tactics against his fellow Democrats, it will just make things worse.
  • On Cap And Trade (Cap & Tax) – The Fat-Lady is already singing.
  • On the Stimulus Package (Tax and Spend) – His popularity is in FREE-FALL.
  • On the TARP package he took and ran with from President Bush – It’s all but Good-Night Irene.
  • On the closing of GITMO and “HIS” war on what he no longer wants called the War On Terrorism – He’s standing in quicksand with his head just about to go under.
  • On a comparison between himself and George W Bush at the same 6 months into their respective first term Presidencies – Bush is ahead of him in the Polls.
  • On a comparison between He Who Walks On Water and the 12 preceding Presidents between WW II and now – Obama ranks 10th.
  • On a Poll just conducted, that asks who would you vote for today between Obama and Mitt Romney – It’s a dead heat.
  • Between Obama and Palin – Obama’s ONLY ahead by 8 points and she hasn’t even begun to campaign.

It seems to me that Obama wants to be everywhere where he shouldn’t be.

He’s personally invested in screwing-over America’s ONLY REAL Middle Eastern ally (Israel) in favor of Palestinian Despots and Murderers.

He’s traveling the world apologizing for the USA while lecturing others on how to do it right, when in fact and truth, he has no experience at doing anything other than getting elected.

He went to the Muslim world in Egypt to declare that America IS NOT A CHRISTIAN NATION while he heaped praises on Islam, where he compared the “plight” of the Palestinians to the Holocaust.

The Russians think he’s a Putz. The French think he’s rude. The Germans want him to stop spending. The Indians want him to mix his nose out of their environmental business. The North Koreans think he’s a joke. The Iranians won’t acknowledge his calls. And the British can’t even come up with a comprehensive opinion of him.

As for the Chinese, he’s too frightened to even glance their way.

Maybe, if America’s first Emperor would stay home more and travel less, and work a little bit instead of being on television just about everyday, or forget about his Wednesday Date Nights with his Amazon Wife, or stop running to “papered” Town Hall Meetings, perhaps he would have a little bit of time to do the work of the nation.

In all fairness, it wasn’t HARD to be RIGHT in my prediction concerning Obama’s Presidency, even in its first 6 months, so I’m going to make yet another prediction:

OBAMA WILL PROBABLY NOT FINISH HIS 4-YEAR TERM, at least not in a conventional way.

He is such a political HORROR-SHOW, and so detrimental to the USA and his own Democratic Party, that the Democrats themselves will either FORCE him to resign or figure out a way to have him thrown out.

Who knows, maybe he really isn’t a BORN US Citizen and that’s a way the Democrats will be able to get rid of him.

Or – MORE LIKELY THAN NOT, the Democrats will make Obama THEIR OWN LAME DUCK PRESIDENT.

I don’t believe the Democrats have nearly as much love for their country as they do for their own political fortunes. And with Obama, their fortunes are rapidly becoming toast.

The Democrats can keep on blaming Bush for EVERYTHING. But, that game’s already begun to wear real thin.

Their mantra was “WE DON’T WANT 4 MORE YEARS”, which the STUPID people bought, since McCain was nothing at all like George W Bush.

The new mantra will soon become: WE DON’T WANT 6 MORE MONTHS.

Best Regards . . . Howard Galganov


Fairness isn’t “Fair” Enough

In one of my previous posts, there has been quite a lively debate about the “Fairness Doctrine” that is also quite illustrative of liberal opinions on free speech, and a lack of understanding concerning basic economics.

https://texan2driver.wordpress.com/2009/02/20/fairness-doctrine-only-the-tip-of-the-iceberg/

Original text and my replies below.

LVKen7@Gmail.com
docs.google.com/Doc?id=dgwzbkk9_988qm93ztg6
LVKen7@Gmail.com
98.160.178.46
Submitted on 2009/02/23 at 2:34pm
Author: texan2driver
Comment:

GADGET: So, with the left controlling 90% of the MODERN media, the liberal point of view isn’t being heard?

LVKen7@Gmail.com: *** Guess YOU don’t understand HOW the FDoctrine worked. All sides of an issue HAD to be presented. Let’s take Rushs show. HE can say ANYTHING ON IT, AND DOES. Truth is Missing.

GADGET (Reply): Once again, your lack of understanding saddens me. I reference Quinn’s Law of Liberalism which states that the effect of liberalism is always opposite of its stated intent. On the surface (which is as far as most liberals, and sadly now most Americans, will dig) the so called “Fairness Doctrine” sounds good. In reality it was designed to silence southern conservatives, and specifically Christian pastors, who were expressing dissent with Truman’s policies. By forcing programming onto radio stations that the listeners did not want to hear, Truman made it ECONOMICALLY unfeasible to air a dissenting opinion. Listeners were driven away by unpalatable programming, which lost revenue for advertisers, which in turn made it impossible to pay for air time. Many radio stations either had to change format to something other than talk radio, or go out of business. It is the same approach, or some disguised variant thereof, that the Obama administration and the democrats plan to employ to silence any dissenting opinion from conservatives.
___________________________________

GADGET: If it weren’t for the few conservative voices that dominate talk radio which is largely relegated to AM radio, there would be only one side presented. You may not like the opinions offered by the right, but unfortunately that’s the flip side of the coin we like to call FREEDOM OF SPEECH.

LVKen7@Gmail.com: *** NO Freedom of Speech is where ALL sides are discussed. Does Rush ALLOW other sides to be discussed? NO. So, HOW is that “FREEDOM OF SPEECH.”

GADGET (Reply): First of all, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Glenn Beck, etc. are ENTERTAINERS. They do not make public policy, and do not and can not give orders to anyone who has any direct impact on your life. Almost all of the ENTERTAINERS in Hollywood are rabid liberals who use their soap box to spout their drivel and expect the world to react as if they WERE elected officials. Am I or other conservatives screaming for the government to shut them up by imposing a “Fairness Doctrine” because they hurt our feelings? We vote against them with our dollars by not going to see their crappy movies. Do you actually listen to any of the conservative talk shows? If you did, you would hear liberal callers all the time. Hannity is probably the best example, especially with his “Hate Hannity Hotline.” Most liberals won’t call in because they can’t refute anything that is being said with facts of their own.

______________________________________________
GADGET: You may have the right to say whatever you like, but you also have to let others do the same even if you disagree with what they say. Feel free to debate those opinions that you disagree with using the facts.

LVKen7@Gmail.com: *** Debate with WHO? Rush? Ha, Ha.

GADGET (Reply): Yes. Debate with Rush if you have the intellectual capacity to do so. Otherwise, find anyone else who disagrees with you and is willing to debate an issue. Debate them openly and honestly using facts, not mere emotion. Try hard to convince your debating opponent that you are right, but be willing to be proven wrong. That is what an honest exchange of ideas is all about. If you prove me wrong on something, I will either concede the point, or go do my research to verify which of us is right. Everyone is better off for the exchange.
_______________________________________________
GADGET: As for your example of Rush Limbaugh saying he hopes Obama fails, you need to put it in context. The statement on its own makes a great sound bite, doesn’t it? The Cliff’s Notes of what he said is something like this. “If Obama were doing what is best for the country, I’d back him all the way. But if he’s taking us down the path to socialism, which I believe he is, then I hope he fails.” Rush did indeed answer the question, but nothing other than the soundbite ever gets air play. It has nothing to do with the fact that Obama is the president. I would want ANYONE who tries to take away my freedom and take us down the path to socialism to fail, and that is exactly what Rush Limbaugh said. He is one of the few with guts enough to be honest about it in today’s politically correct environment.

LVKen7@Gmail.com: **** It was NOT a sound bite. IT WAS A HEADLINE ON HIS WEB SITE.
**** BUT IT WAS ON HIS WEB SITE. YOU can try as hard as you want, to spin it another way, but RUSH HATES THE USA.

Today (Monday 2-23-09)
He had THIS POSTED ON HIS Site
http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_021309/content/01125114.guest.html
Let me give them some more fodder:
I want the stimulus package to fail. ‘Cause if this thing for the first time ever does what it never has done before, we’re in even worse trouble. If it becomes established that the federal government and the federal government alone can manage the economy and take over the private sector, then forget it, folks. I’m looking for property in New Zealand, and I’m going to put my money in Singapore. I do not want this to succeed, and nobody who has any respect for the founding of this country and for the capitalist system, who is honest and who has looked at it, would want it to succeed either. We are being told it must succeed because it’s Obama’s. Well, what’s such a big deal about Obama? Somebody tell me. Somebody tell me.”

GADGET (Reply): Did you read my original reply? Did you listen to or read the ENTIRE text surrounding his original statement and/or his follow up in the article that YOU cite? He explained himself quite well to anyone willing to listen. If someone wants to take large portions of your hard earned income, do you want them to succeed or fail? If someone wants to tell you how you can or must spend what little money you have left, do you want them to succeed or fail? If someone wants to take away many of the freedoms we hold dear, do you want them to succeed or fail? I would hope that you would want those people to fail. Conservatives believe that Obama and the democrats want to do these things, and more. We do not wish any of these people personal harm or ill will, we just don’t want our money, freedom and property taken from us only to be given to those who didn’t earn it and don’t deserve it. Just because he, or anyone else disagrees with you, you believe they hate the USA? If you disagree, please refer to my statement above concerning honest debate.
_________________________________________________
GADGET: Leaving your e-mail address is a personal decision. Obviously I can be reached via this blog. Many feel that there is some security risk to leaving their e-mail address, or that at the very least it increases the amount of spam they receive. I appreciate your willingness to be accessible to those you debate with.

LVKen7@Gmail.com: *** To ME it is Cowardly to be Anonymous.
KJ

GADGET (Reply): Actually, KJ, it’s being cautious and smart. When liberals express an opinion that conservatives disagree with, MOST conservatives won’t go after that liberal and key his car and slash the tires, or vandalize his home, or call his home with death threats for him and the entire family, or publicly slander that person without cause or proof JUST BECAUSE THEY EXPRESSED AN OPINION. A little known fact (because the 90% liberal media that apparently needs more help from the “Fairness Doctrine” won’t report on it) is that the converse of the above is true, and many conservatives are indeed attacked in various ways simply for expressing an opinion. Did you hear about the kid, yes that’s CHILD, in California who decided that he wasn’t going to swear or use foul language? He formed a club of other CHILDREN who believed the same thing. Simply for taking a small stand against indecency, and choosing to express himself intellectually, he and his family received death threats and other forms of abuse. I guess free speech only applies to those who agree with the left. If you don’t agree with the liberals, you are a hater. That’s the opinion and statement most liberals immediately default to when they can no longer compete on the battlefield of ideas. It is these small minded people that I try to protect my family from. If that makes me a coward, then so be it.

%d bloggers like this: