Kirsten Powers’ Full Comments In Regards to Administration`s Failure w/ Libya and the Legacy Media`s Complicit Behavior

From video description:

I came across some video of Kirsten Powers being rationally honest, a trait she exhibits well from time-to-time even though a liberal Democrat. (Posted by: Religio-Political Talk) The original video can be found at The Right Scoop, but I wanted more, and found it. So here is her full comment on the issue of Libya and how the administration tried to package the narrative a couple of weeks ago via Susan Rice, the United States Ambassador to the United Nations.

It is now widely known that the administration knew it was a terrorist planned attack within 24-hours, and for the full week afterwards the media (still — in actuality) seems to have covered for the administration as well. This is what Miss Powers is commenting on, honestly, and truthfully. It comes from Special Report Online… where the panel on Special Report continues frank discussion after the main show. Here is Right Scoop’s comments:

Kirsten Powers believes that media bias has gotten out of control on the issue of the Benghazi attack and the subsequent lies from the Obama administration on what happened. There are so many questions that need answering and she says that the media could possibly be complicit in another terrorist attack on America if they don’t get to the bottom of what is happening here. She cites the attacks on our embassies pre-9/11 as warnings back then, and says Al-Qaeda is not dead and the media should be asking what this really means.

Kirstin Powers actually has a great column on this topic as well:

Write About Terrorism? Nah, Let’s All Bash Mitt Romney Instead!

MSNBC Caught Editing Audio, AGAIN

The caller above says the same thing… so does the caller into The Blaze:

“The crowd was yelling,” caller Sherry recounts, “the crowd was screaming ‘Romney! Romney!’ and Romney, being the gentleman [he is], we can‘t get in his head because he’s so stinking nice, he stopped us to add ‘Romney-Ryan.’”

“And if you watch the clip again, Ryan throws up his hand like ‘oh, you don’t have to add me to the chant,’”

Libertarian Republican has this combo video of the Glenn Beck Show and the MSNCBC report:

The Blaze has another video further down its posting from a different stop that Romney goes through the same routine. And that is what it is, the same speech at every stop:

Larry Elder Destroys ABC`s Jonathan Karl`s Report on Romney`s Tax Returns

From Video Description:

Larry Elder leads off with small talk about Hollywood’s silence on censorship, he plays SNL’s skit about undecided voters (video included), and even addresses Robert Gibbs tough questioning by Chris Wallace on Fox News Sunday (video included). (Posted by: Religio-Political Talk) Then “The Sage” settles into his forte… stats. Quoting liberal sources he dissects Jonathan Karl’s ABC report (video included) and the general lunacy of the legacy media in stacking the deck against Romney. Long, but worth listening to.

For stories related to this report from Jonathan, see NewsBusters:

  1. ABC’s Karl Dissembles on Romney’s Tax Rate, But NBC Points Out He Pays Higher Percent Than Middle Class
  2. Nets Use Romney’s Taxes to Advance Obama’s False ‘Fairness’ Narrative

For more clear thinking like this from Larry Elder… I invite you to visit: http://www.larryelder.com/

 

Prager Reads from Walter Russell Mead’s Article on `Legacy Media` ~ Sooo True!

From video description:

Great insights into the differences between if there were a Republican in office right now. (Posted by: Religio-Political Talk)

For more clear thinking like this from Dennis Prager… I invite you to visit: http://www.dennisprager.com/

Here is a bit of the article entitled, “Americans Turn on MSM: What Does It Mean?

———————————

…If the president were a conservative Republican rather than a liberal Democrat, I have little doubt that much of the legacy press would be focused more on what is wrong with America. There would be more negative reporting about the economy, more criticism of policy failures and many more withering comparisons between promise and performance. The contrast between a rising stock market and poor jobs performance that the press now doesn’t think of blaming on President Obama would be reported as demonstrating a systemic bias in favor of the rich and the powerful if George W. Bush were in the White House. The catastrophic decline in African-American net worth during the last four years would, if we had a Republican president, be presented in the press as illustrating the racial indifference or even the racism of the administration. As it is, it is just an unfortunate reality, not worth much publicity and telling us nothing about the intentions or competence of the people in charge.

The current state of the Middle East would be reported as illustrating the complete collapse of American foreign policy—if Bush were in the White House. The criticism of drone strikes and Guantanamo that is now mostly confined to the far left would be mainstream conventional wisdom, and the current unrest in the Middle East would be depicted as a response to American militarism. The in and out surge in Afghanistan would be mercilessly exposed as a strategic flop, reflecting the naive incompetence of an inexperienced president out of his depth. The SEALS rather than the White House would be getting the credit for the death of Osama bin Laden, and there would be more questions about whether killing him and then bragging endlessly and tastelessly about it was a contributing factor to the current unrest. Political cartoons of Cheney spiking the football would be everywhere.  It’s also likely we would have heard much more about how killing Osama was strategically unimportant as he had become an increasingly symbolic figure and there would have been a lot of detailed and focused analysis of how the foolish concentration on bin Laden led the clueless Bush administration to neglect the rise of new and potentially much more dangerous Islamist groups in places like Mali. The Libyan war would be widely denounced as an unconstitutional act of neocon militarism, with much more attention paid to the civilian casualties during the war, the chaos that followed, and the destabilizing effects on the neighborhood. The White House fumbling around the Benghazi murders would be treated like a major scandal and dominate the news for at least a couple of weeks.

If Bush were in the White House, the Middle East would be a horrible disaster, and it would all be America’s fault.

Many people on the right look at this and other examples and conclude that the major press outlets are deliberately distorting the news in the hope of shifting public opinion to the left and supporting the President’s re-election. This is not, in my view, the main reason for press bias, but it is a real phenomenon. There clearly are people in the press who think they are called to this work to support and further a political and moral vision of what kind of place America should be. They have come to the media because they want to “change the world” as so many idealistic young people put it. As human beings who try to incorporate their ideals and their passions into their professional lives, they believe in many cases that conservative governance would be a disaster for the country, and they are sure that an “informed” public opinion would reject conservative nostrums. Given that, they want to make sure that their own work contributes to an enlightened, informed public opinion and so they consciously approach their work by looking for stories or angles that reinforce liberal narratives and undermine conservative ones. Environmental reporting in the MSM is largely dominated in my reading by this kind of activist journalism; there are a lot of reporters out there who yearn to Save the Planet…

Media Bias in Headlines from the Past Two Days (Plus some past examples showing the `left lean`)

Just some headlines to exemplify the neutrality of the mainstream media:

★ Ex-Newsweek’s Alter Slams Paul Ryan Budget As ‘Cruel’ (MSNBC)

★ Ex-Newsweek’s Fineman Slams Chris Christie Speech as ‘Nasty’ and ‘Mean’ (MSNBC)

★ CNN Analyst Ridicu

les ‘Sledgehammer’ GOP Platform on Abortion

★ Joy Behar (CNN): People Like Romney and Ryan Are ‘Trying to Kill Us’

★ Artur Davis Schools CNN: ‘Easy’ ‘to Do What You Guys Are Doing’

★ ABC Hammers at Romney’s ‘Likability Problem’

★ MSNBC’s O’Donnell [an self-proclaimed socialist] Rips Ann Romney For Ignoring ‘Struggling’ Women Who Rely on Government

★ NBC’s Brian Williams Obnoxiously Presses Rubio About GOP’s ‘Rape Debate’

★ MSNBCers Upset at ‘Bar Bouncing’ Boehner’s ‘Ugly Imagery’

★ CNN Asks If GOP Holding Convention Tuesday Is ‘Appropriate’

★ CNN’s Acosta Tries to Put Obama’s ‘You Didn’t Build That’ In Context

★ Pelley Pushes Ann Romney on ‘Whether Republicans Have Women’s Best Interests at Heart?’

★ NYTimes Fills News Gap With Overblown Stories on Discord Among ‘Straight-Laced’ GOP ‘Squares’

★ Former NBC Reporter Tells Maddow: All Romney Has Going For Him Is His Whiteness

★ Actual Washington Post Headline: ‘Did God Plan Isaac to Punish Republicans?’

★ NBC Panel Slams Christie As ‘Bully’ Who ‘Will Never Be Accepted Across This Country’

★ Charlie Rose to Marco Rubio: ‘Many People Worry’ GOP Is Anti-Hispanic

★ Yahoo’s David Chalian (ABC/Yahoo Live-feed): Romneys ‘Happy to Have a Party With Black People Drowning’

★ Greed and Debt: The True Story of Mitt Romney and Bain Capital; Mitt Romney Gets Rolling Stoned: Former Music Mag Dedicates Latest Edition to Bashing Romney [The former music magazine known as Rolling Stone published three hit pieces on Mitt Romney this week.]

Just a couple of examples of the “straight” “down-the-line” reporting of the non existent media bias.

[UPDATED] It`s not Christians banning rock music, so the entertainment media is just not interested (Christianity is Culturally Superior To Islam)

Posting again professor Jowitt’s long ago relative point for this update:

UPDATED: Via Gateway Pundit:

  • Taliban Beheads 17 Civilians For Attending Dance Party

Barack Obama’s peace partners, the Taliban, beheaded 17 civilians for dancing and singing including two women.
AFP reported:

Insurgents beheaded 17 civilians in a Taliban-controlled area of southern Afghanistan, apparently because they attended a dance party that flouted the extreme brand of Islam embraced by the militants, officials said Monday.

The killings, in a district where U.S. Marines have battled the Taliban for years, were a reminder of how much power the insurgent group still wields in the south — particularly as international forces draw down and hand areas over to Afghan forces.

The victims were part of a large group that had gathered late Sunday in Helmand province’s Musa Qala district for a celebration involving music and dancing, said district government chief Neyamatullah Khan. He said the Taliban slaughtered them to show their disapproval of the event.

All of the bodies were decapitated but it was not clear if they had been shot first, said provincial government spokesman Daoud Ahmadi.

Under Taliban laws all music is banned except certain types of religious songs and pro-Taliban ‘chants’.

…read more…


From Libertarian Republican:

[….]

Madonna, Rihanna or Youssou Ndour, all non-Muslim lyrics have been declared Satanic.

“We, the mujahideen of Gao, Timbuktu and Kidal from now on refuse the broadcasting of all western music on radios on Islamic land,” said Oussama Ould Abdel Kader, a spokesman for the Movement for Oneness and Jihad in West Africa (MUJAO)

“We have already spoken to people who own the radio stations. We no longer want Satan’s music. Instead there must be verses of the Qur’an. Western music is Satanic music.”

Editor’s comment – Remember growing up in the 1980s? Kurt Loder and MTV News and Rolling Stone magazine blasted the Parents Music Resource Center (PMRC), and rightly so, for wanting to ban explicity rock music. The PMRC called some of the heavy metal music “Satanic.” Of course, the PMRC were Christian Right Americans. But its been decades since Christians pushed for rock music bans. Now, it’s Muslims. And lo and behold, there’s no coverage at any music or entertainment media. Must not fit the template.

…read more…

What does Islam say about music and musical instruments… I bet you never knew, via Jihad Watch:

Hadith Qudsi 19:5: “The Prophet said that Allah commanded him to destroy all the musical instruments, idols, crosses and all the trappings of ignorance.” (The Hadith Qudsi, or holy Hadith, are those in which Muhammad transmits the words of Allah, although those words are not in the Qur’an.)

Muhammad also said:

(1) “Allah Mighty and Majestic sent me as a guidance and mercy to believers and commanded me to do away with musical instruments, flutes, strings, crucifixes, and the affair of the pre-Islamic period of ignorance.”

(2) “On the Day of Resurrection, Allah will pour molten lead into the ears of whoever sits listening to a songstress.”

(3) “Song makes hypocrisy grow in the heart as water does herbage.”

(4) “This community will experience the swallowing up of some people by the earth, metamorphosis of some into animals, and being rained upon with stones.” Someone asked, “When will this be, O Messenger of Allah?” and he said, “When songstresses and musical instruments appear and wine is held to be lawful.”

(5) “There will be peoples of my Community who will hold fornication, silk, wine, and musical instruments to be lawful ….” — Umdat al-Salik r40.0

…read more…

Music and instruments are key to church worship and glorifying God. God, in fact, loves instruments, and this is why Islam hates it… hint: a false God:

Vocal Praise to God

The primary purpose of this analysis is to separate references to vocal praise from those mentioning musical accompaniment. This first category contains all the references of worship to God, which contained only vocals. If instruments of music were actually used in the following passages, there is no reference to it in the context:

Exodus 15:1-18; Numbers 21:17; Deuteronomy 31:19-32:44; Judges 5:1-12; II Samuel 22:1; II Samuel 22:50; I Kings 4:32; I Chronicles 6:31-33; I Chronicles 9:33; II Chronicles 23:18; II Chronicles 35:15; II Chronicles 35:25; Ezra 2:41, 65, 70; Ezra 7:7, 24; 20:24; Nehemiah 7:1, 44, 67, 73; Nehemiah 10:28, 39; Nehemiah 11:22-23; Nehemiah 13:5, 10; Job 35:10; Isaiah 5:1; Isaiah 12:2, 5; Isaiah 24:14, 16; Isaiah 26:1; Isaiah 35:10; Isaiah 42:10-11; Isaiah 44:23; Isaiah 48:20; Isaiah 49:13; Isaiah 51:3, 11; Isaiah 52:8-9; Jeremiah 20:13; Jeremiah 31:7; Jeremiah 31:12; Jeremiah 33:11; Ezekiel 40:44; Amos 8:3, 10; Jonah 2:9; Zephaniah 3:14, 17; Zechariah 2:10; Matthew 26:30; Mark 14:26; Acts 16:25; Romans 15:9; I Corinthians 14:15; I Corinthians 14:26; Ephesians 5:19; Colossians 3:16; Hebrews 2:12; James 5:13

Although many of the Psalms note accompaniment of musical instruments, many reference singing with no mention of instruments. These references are provided below:

Psalm 7:17; 9:2, 11; 13:6; 18:1, 49; 21:13; 27:6; 28:7; 30:1, 4, 12; 32:7; 34:1; 35:1; 40:3; 42:8; 51:14; 59:16; 61:8; 65:13; 66:2-4; 69:12, 30; 77:6; 89:1; 95:1,2; 96:1, 2; 100:2; 101:1; 104:12, 33; 105:2; 118:14; 119:54; 126:2; 135:3; 138:1, 5; 145:7; 146:2

Instrumental Praise to God

It cannot be denied that instruments of music have been rightfully used to praise the Creator, neither should it be. If God saw fit to authorize mechanical instruments of music, then His wisdom should not be questioned. Likewise, His judgment must not be questioned if He later changed His mind, “for we walk by faith, not by sight” (II Corinthians 5:7).

Exodus 15:20-21; I Samuel 10:5; II Samuel 6:5, 15, 21; I Kings 10:12; II Kings 12:13; I Chronicles 13:8; I Chronicles 15:16-29; I Chronicles 16:5-9, 23, 42; I Chronicles 23:5; I Chronicles 25:1-7; II Chronicles 5:12-13; II Chronicles 7:6; II Chronicles 9:11; II Chronicles 15:14; II Chronicles 20:19-28; II Chronicles 29:25-30; II Chronicles 30:21; II Chronicles 34:12; Ezra 3:10; Nehemiah 12:8-47; Isaiah 5:12; Isaiah 30:29; Isaiah 38:20; Amos 5:23; Amos 6:5; Habakkuk 3:19; Revelation 5:8-9; Revelation 14:2-3; Revelation 15:2-3

Many of the Psalms have ancient subscripts, mentioning how they were to be sung, or played. Many of these titles include references to instruments, such as “string instruments”, “flutes”, and “harps”. Others mention mechanical instruments specifically in the Psalm itself. Psalms with references to musical accompaniment include:

Psalm 4:1; 5:1; 6:1; 8:1; 12:1; 33:2, 3; 43:4; 47:5-7; 49:4; 54:1; 55:1; 57:7-9; 61:1; 67:1,4; 68:4, 25, 32; 71:22-23; 76:1; 81:1-3; 84:1; 87:7; 92:3; 98:1, 4-6; 108:1-3; 137:2-4; 144:9; 147:1, 7; 149:1, 3, 5; 150:3-4

Merriment and Bereavement

Whether it be a marriage feast (Jeremiah 7:34) or a funeral (II Samuel 1:17-27; Matthew 9:23), music is often referenced as an expression of intense joy or sorrow. In each of these passages, the context is not religious. Often the context is social, like a marriage feast. These passages were separated from others, because they do not directly relate to the form of musical praise to God, although they provide intriguing knowledge to the place of music in the culture of the ancients.

Genesis 31:27; Exodus 32:18; Judges 11:34; I Samuel 16:16-23; I Samuel 18:6-10; I Samuel 19:9; I Samuel 21:11; II Samuel 1:18; I Kings 1:40; Job 21:12; Job 29:13; Job 30:9; Job 30:31; Psalm 75:9; Proverbs 25:20; Proverbs 29:6; Ecclesiastes 2:8; Ecclesiastes 7:5; Song of Solomon 2:12; Isaiah 14:7, 11; Isaiah 16:10, 11; Isaiah 23:15, 16; Isaiah 24:8, 9; Isaiah 26:19; Isaiah 30:32; Isaiah 35:2, 6; Isaiah 54:1; Isaiah 55:12; Jeremiah 7:34; Jeremiah 16:9; Jeremiah 25:10; Jeremiah 30:19; Jeremiah 51:48; Lamentations 5:14; Daniel 3:5-15; Daniel 6:18; Hosea 2:15; Matthew 9:23; Matthew 11:17; Luke 7:32; Luke 15:25; Revelation 18:22-23

The Message of Horns

Trumpets and horns were used in musical praise; however, they were often used in relation to sounding a battle communication. The blast of a trumpet was used to signal everything from the anointing of a new king (II Samuel 15:10) to the call to battle (Judges 3:27), and from welcoming a holy feast day (Leviticus 23:24) to instructing the host of Israel to begin marching (Numbers 10:2-10). In the absence of megaphones, the sound of trumpets could travel long distances, conveying important messages to large numbers of people. These references are separated, because they deal with the sounds of communication – not the melody of worship.

Leviticus 23:24, 25:9; Numbers 10:2-10; Numbers 29:1; Numbers 31:6; Joshua 6:4-20; Judges 3:27; Judges 6:34; Judges 7:8-22; I Samuel 13:3; II Samuel 2:28; II Samuel 15:10; II Samuel 18:16; II Samuel 20:1, 22; I Kings 1:34; I Kings 1:39-45; II Kings 9:13; II Kings 11:14; II Chronicles 13:12, 14; II Chronicles 23:13; Nehemiah 4:18, 20; Job 39:24; Job 39:25; Isaiah 18:3; Isaiah 58:1; Isaiah 65:14; Jeremiah 4:5, 19, 21; Jeremiah 6:1, 17; Jeremiah 51:27; Ezekiel 7:14; Ezekiel 26:13; Ezekiel 33:3-6; Hosea 5:8; Hosea 8:1; Joel 2:1, 15; Amos 2:2; Amos 3:6; Zephaniah 1:16; Matthew 6:2; I Corinthians 13:1; I Corinthians 14:7-8

The Trumps of God

Trumpets and horns are often associated with God’s royal presence and power. Like the horns of war, these trumpets also convey a message – they signify the entrance of the King. However, sometime they are associated with the King’s work in judgment. Although these might be considered in the above category, because of the association with battle, references that associate trumpets with God’s judgment are grouped in their own special category.

Exodus 19:13-19, 20:18; Isaiah 27:13; Zechariah 9:14; Matthew 24:31; I Corinthians 15:52; I Thessalonians 4:16; Hebrews 12:19; Revelation 8:2-9:14; 10:7; 11:5;

A Horn of Exaltation

Closely related with the blowing horns of victory, which would have been heard bellowing across the battlefield, horns were associated with victory and exaltation. Additionally, since they were often used to carry anointing oils, they are also associated with the glory of election. Although not directly related to music, these references to horns are significant, and are therefore worthy of their own category:

I Samuel 2:1, 10; I Samuel 16:1, 13; II Samuel 22:3; I Kings 1:39; Psalm 75:4, 5, 10; Psalm 89:24; Ezekiel 29:21; Luke 1:69

Miscellaneous

Including mention of the father of stringed instruments (Genesis 4:21), miscellaneous references to music and its instruments are sprinkled throughout the Scriptures. Although these may be important to another topic, they are not relevant to understanding the nature, purpose, or form of God’s desired musical praise. These references include:

Genesis 4:21; Genesis 4:23; Exodus 28:31-35; II Samuel 19:35; II Samuel 23:1; II Kings 3:15; Ecclesiastes 12:4; Song of Solomon 1:1; Isaiah 25:5; Isaiah 27:2; Jeremiah 48:36; Lamentations 3:63; Ezekiel 33:32; Zephaniah 2:14; Revelation 1:10; Revelation 4:1

(SOURCE)

New York Times `Bleeds` progressivism ~ Says its Public Editor

Via Powerline:

Arthur Brisbane is stepping down from his job as public editor of the New York Times. In his final column, Brisbane addresses the issue of political and cultural bias at the Times (the emphasis is mine):

I. . .noted two years ago that I had taken up the public editor duties believing “there is no conspiracy” and that The Times’s output was too vast and complex to be dictated by any Wizard of Oz-like individual or cabal. I still believe that, but also see that the hive on Eighth Avenue is powerfully shaped by a culture of like minds — a phenomenon, I believe, that is more easily recognized from without than from within.

When The Times covers a national presidential campaign, I have found that the lead editors and reporters are disciplined about enforcing fairness and balance, and usually succeed in doing so. Across the paper’s many departments, though, so many share a kind of political and cultural progressivism — for lack of a better term — that this worldview virtually bleeds through the fabric of The Times.

As a result, developments like the Occupy movement and gay marriage seem almost to erupt in The Times, overloved and undermanaged, more like causes than news subjects.

…read more…

An Example of Media Bias ~ 2016: Obama`s America

NewsBusters rightly points out the left leaning bias of major news outlets with this — one of many — examples:

The Washington Post film review of the new conservative documentary 2016 mocked the movie as a “fear-mongering” “infomercial” that is too opinionated. The same paper, however, gushed over the “emotional power” of liberal filmmaker Michael Moore’s Fahrenheit 9/11, praising it as a “cultural juggernaut.”

2016 reviewer Michael O’Sullivan knocked the “slick infomercial,” deriding, “As these things go, the movie seems destined to irritate the president’s supporters while mobilizing his detractors, even as it is doomed to win precious few converts. It’s a textbook example of preaching to the choir.” In contrast, Fahrenheit 9/11 critic Desson Thomson defended, “Documentaries aren’t news articles; they’re subjective points of view, which is why Moore has almost endless fun at the president’s expense.”

Thomson explained away the hard-left tilt of Moore’s movie this way:

What counts is the emotional power of Moore’s persuasion. With a combination of events and facts that we have already learned, and some that we haven’t, Moore puts it all together. You can understand the thread of his argument, even if you disagree.

In comparison, O’Sullivan huffed that 2016 is “anything but crude. The best infomercials rarely are.”

…read more…