Julie responds in her “patented” way to a sign at the women’s march in Washington:
Or the Washington Post (WaPo) publishing an article on Thursday on how the Russians used American websites to push anti-Hillary Clinton propaganda in the 2016 election. The problem was, however, the the source for their story admitted to lying:
Or how bout when the L.A. Times knew about John Edwards affair while running for President, but kept the story bottled up:
Or NPR’s bias of omission with 18,321 words in pro-Arab only segments, 4,934 words in pro-Israel segments. Bias in number of Arab-only vs Israeli-only segments: 63-percent Palestinian/pro-Arab only segments, 37-percent Israel/pro-Israel segments (CAMERA). Or, as the WASHINGTON TIMES notes, mainstream media outlets advocating certain outcomes:
How bout the medias tendency to not be fair and balanced, thus, guiding public opinion in some way (stories linked in graphics):
Some older examples from ABC, NBC, CBS that include some stats on story imbalances…. as IF they are trying to advocate for something… hmmm:
So all the recent “HUB-BUB” in regards to “fake news” is really an attempt to control the news by corporate news interests. If you do not know WHY this is not a good thing, please read 1984 again. And this bias is not conspiratorial as much as a worldview issue that cause it’s adherents not to lie or conspire about slanting stories as much as a form of group-think. (ALTHOUGH THIS “CONSPIRING” DOES HAPPEN.) Often times this “group-think” is ripped from it’s context to say people are involved in a giant conspiracy.
- The media as a whole is said to be in a giant conspiracy to overthrow America or conservatives by a designed plan.
- No, it is group-think, their worldview dictates truth to them.
- Many people think there is a nefarious cabal of bankers, CFR and Bilderberger types, controlling human affairs on such a level that World Wars were started and guided by these people.
- No, it is group-think, their worldview dictates a border-less society with all being equal… “just ‘some’ more equal than others” (Animal Farm).
- I often hear people mention that “how could scientist all agree then with evolution? Are you saying there is a giant conspiracy? If you are, I am through listening to you, being that you are crazy.” [BTW, one can substitute “climate change” issues with evolution.]
- No… groupthink…
And this is the crux of the matter… No matter if there is a conspiracy or not, the goals are the same. BUT — and this is an important BUT — how one responds and interacts with society is impacted… greatly. In other words if you tell people of these “grand conspiracies” or “meta-narratives” you will not change anyone’s mind but harm your position. However, if you talk about worldviews and group-think, you will impact minds on the matter, thus, fortifying the case trying to made in regards to media bias.
Hugh Hewitt talks about a time he got to speak to a graduating class of journalists at [I think] Columbia University School of Journalism. He asked the crowd some questions and asked them to separate themselves to one side or the other of the auditorium ~ (questions like: are you pro-life or pro-choice?… are you pro 2nd amendment of for gun control? etc., etc.). By the end of the 5-questions, only a handful were left on one side… all the liberal/progressives were packed into one side of the auditorium. His point was to show this graduating class that what they believe now will impact their work, and that they should be aware [self-aware] of their own biases and try to be reporters, not “change” agents.
(Link to Wikileaks emails showing collusion with Hillary and the Media)
Another recent example can be expressed in donations to campaigns. In an excellent article entitled, “Journalists shower Hillary Clinton with campaign cash: Far fewer making contributions to Donald Trump, analysis shows,” we see the percentages donated from journalists to the Hillary or Trump campaigns:
Via THE BLAZE
- “It’s interesting. The big city with the most unintentional, accidental homicides or accidental killings was Chicago, Illinois, where there are no gun stores and there are no gun ranges and JROTC is not in the school system. There’s no way to get education; there’s no way to get training.
Dennis Prager touches on Donald Trumps poor use of the English vernacular to express his poor thinking. The bottom line is that Trump should stay on script and (b) we shouldn’t allow the media to form the narrative. One comment on another video on this topic reads:
I wish to reword this a bit myself:
➤ “Hillary wants to abolish – essentially abolish – the Second Amendment. If she gets to pick her judges, nothing you can do, folks. Although the NRA and other pro-second amendment groups could continue the fight. But if Hillary gets to appoint judges for the Court, that would be a horrible day.”
HotAir comments on Dan Rather’s rather obnoxious indignation:
Before continuing, not how the story is presented, and then see Kayleigh McEnany rightly note the correct view of what Trump said:
Using the Left’s logic, however, we see that Hillary called for the assassination of Obama in 2008 (POWERLINE!):
Anti-gun media outlets have made much of the NRA’s refusal to rush to judgment in the shooting death of Philando Castile to push the narrative that the organization “doesn’t care about black people.” Colion Noir fires back against that claim, pointing out that the NRA fights effectively for the constitutional rights of people of all races.
- In making its case that the popular AR-15 is a “common element in mass shootings,” the New York Times, citing the owner of a gun engineering company, reported the semi-automatic rifle can FIRE EIGHT ROUNDS PER SECOND.
The Blaze then quotes Olympic shooter AMANDA FURRER (pictured below) saying she can only shoot 3-rounds a second, and she shoots guns for a living!
In regards to the Grayson’s comment, my son (a Marine) and I were rolling over all the variables involved in his 700-rounds a minute statement:
Taking Amanda’s ability, and assuming she had a magazine or a belt with enough ammo on it, as well as assuming no muscular degradation in muscle ability from pulling the trigger for a minute straight, she would be able to shoot 180-rounds a minute.
These people [leftist media’ites and Democrats] are idiots, that is the only explanation. I thought this video by DOM RASO would be fitting considering the topic:
THE BLAZE reports on this incident that could have turned into a mass shooting:
Other shooting that could have turned into a “mass shooting” but didn’t because of an armed citizen are these (there are many more, but this is good enough for the point):
1. The Pearl High School Shooting
2. The Parker Middle School Dance Shooting
3. The Appalachian School of Law Shooting
4. The New Life Church Shooting
5. The Trolley Square Shooting
6. The Golden Market Shooting
7. The New York Mills AT&T Store Shooting
8. The Clackamas Town Center Shooting
9. The San Antonio Theater Shooting