“Paybacks a Bitch!” ~ Neil Cavuto vs. CNN

(YOUNG CONS H-T)

PJ-MEDIA notes some of this contentious past:

…Did the New York Times fear freedom of the press had been eradicated? No, the headline was simply that “Fox’s Volley With Obama” was … “Intensifying.”

Ironically, current CNN host and Trump critic Brian Stelter wrote the article.

It begins:

Attacking the news media is a time-honored White House tactic but to an unusual degree, the Obama administration has narrowed its sights to one specific organization, the Fox News Channel, calling it, in essence, part of the political opposition.

We’re going to treat them the way we would treat an opponent,” said Anita Dunn, the White House communications director, in a telephone interview on Sunday. “As they are undertaking a war against Barack Obama and the White House, we don’t need to pretend that this is the way that legitimate news organizations behave.”

In 2009, the White House’s position on Fox News was that it was “an opponent,” at “war(!)” with the White House. And that they were not, in fact, a legitimate news organization.

They were to be treated as fake news. It was White House policy.

INDEPENDENT JOURNAL REVIEW continues the dossier of Obama’s attack on free speech:

…In the Obama team’s eyes, Fox News was a right-wing propaganda machine. As Anita Dunn, the White House communications director at the time, put it in an appearance on CNN:

“What I think is fair to say about Fox — and certainly it’s the way we view it — is that it really is more a wing of the Republican Party. They take their talking points, put them on the air; take their opposition research, put them on the air. And that’s fine. But let’s not pretend they’re a news network the way CNN is.”

Ouch. (An early version of the “fake news” attack?)

That wasn’t all. The White House used its official blog to publicly call out what it labeled “Fox lies.” Politico referred to the sharp attack from the executive branch on a news organization as “unusual.” The White House also deliberately excluded Fox News from a round robin of presidential interviews in September 2009.

Dan Pffeifer, the White House deputy communications director, defended the administration’s stance towards Fox this way:

“We simply decided to stop abiding by the fiction, which is aided and abetted by the mainstream press, that Fox is a traditional news organization.”

The New York Times wrote an entire piece about the war between the government and the network. In fact, this attitude was so prevalent, and was escalated with such ferocity, that the White House press pool (the five-network rotation that shares the costs and duties of daily coverage) finally united behind Fox News and put an end to it:

The Treasury Department on Thursday tried to make “pay czar” Kenneth Feinberg available for interviews to every member of the network pool except Fox News….

But the Washington bureau chiefs of the five TV networks consulted and decided that none of their reporters would interview Feinberg unless Fox News was included.

That didn’t stop President Obama from airing his disdain for Fox News Channel. In 2010, he said in an interview that Fox News was “destructive.” In 2013, he made a joke in a speech to students at Fox News’ expense. In 2014 he told Bill O’Reilly that the network was “unfair” to him. And most recently, last year, he blamed Fox News and its viewers for Hillary Clinton’s loss….

BBC vs Blogosphere |or| Fake vs. Real News (UPDATED)

This is via VLAD TEPES (with a h-t to GATEWAY PUNDIT). Mind you, the BBC report may have been right after the event, but they had the audio and I will comment on searches today on their YouTube Channel and site. Here is what the BBC reported was said: “Reportedly witnesses say that he shouted out ‘Aleppo’ and ‘revenge.'” Here is the report:

After perusing the BBC’s YouTube Channel and website, I continually find this written:

  • He can be heard yelling “Don’t forget about Aleppo, don’t forget about Syria” and uses the Islamic phrase “Allahu Akbar” (God is great).

And in a later broadcast recapping the event, you can see the same is said:

There seems to be a whitewashing of the message for the larger audience. Here is the fuller “yelling” his allegiance to the founder of Islam:

  • Killer: “Allahu Akbar! Allahu Akbar! We are those who have given a pledge of allegiance to Muhammad that we will carry on Jihad as long as we live. Allahu Akbar. Don’t forget Allepo. Don’t forget Syria. Don’t forget Allepo. Don’t forget Syria. As long as our towns are not secure you won’t have taste of security. Back off. Back off. Only death will take me away from here. everyone who has contributed to this cruelty will pay, one by one.

VLAD has the video subtitled

JIHAD WATCH has some great reporting on the issue as well. Terror Attacks Since 9/11Jihad Watch quickly noted for instance that the assassin is making the one-finger-upraised signal that has come to signify allegiance to the Islamic State. The shooter is said to be part of a special ops team, as well as being on the private security detail of Erdogan on multiple occasions. This death will surely be added to the counter to the right!

Single-Payer The Goal (Obama-Care)

 

SPIKING PREMIUMS THE GOAL

The designer of Obamacare, noted today as premiums spike more that the bill is working as designed (the video included his latest remarks coupled with his earlier remarks):

ZERO HEDGE notes (see also BREITBART):

Massachusetts Institute of Technology Professor and architect of ObamaCare Jonathan Gruber told CNN’s Carol Costello on Wednesday that ObamaCare, which is set to see a sharp increase in premium prices next year, is going just as planned.

When asked what could be done to the Affordable Care Act in order to drive the prices of premiums down, Gruber responded by saying “the law is working as designed.”

WORKING AS DESIGNED?

YES, as designed:

I have pointed this out before… single-payer is the goal:

An after thought. Since the DNC leadership has said — recently — the goal is single-payer… the question becomes this then: “what other area of life would a person want single payer in?” The airlines? Fast-food? Grocery stores? Car dealers? Education? Gyms?

In other words, why would someone reject a single airline, a single grocery-store (sorry weekend BBQ’ers, no more carne-asada from Vallerta), one gym, etc. — competition drives prices down and offers the best way (supply and demand) to get to the consumer what they want… but reject all that for a system that is failing in Canada, Britain, and the like?

It seems counter-intuitive that the left likes to break up large companies/corporations that get too big, and speak about/to the “evils” large companies inflict on the consumer, but then want single-payer. Odd indeed.

…read more…

DEMOCRATS WANTS SINGLE-PAYER

HOT AIR notes the push to single-payer in light of Obama-Care’s abject failure:

Obama-Care Architect Max Baucus Endorses Single-Payer

…Thirty-nine days later, Bernie Sanders is set to introduce a “Medicare for all” bill backed by big-name Dems like Kamala Harris and Elizabeth Warren while Republicans Lindsey Graham and Bill Cassidy are pushing a bill that would let individual states keep ObamaCare in place.

[….]

Why is it a big deal that Max Baucus has now come around as well? Well, it’s not just that he was one of the architects of O-Care in 2009 as head of the Senate Finance Committee, making his “evolution” towards socialized medicine particularly noteworthy. It’s that Baucus was one of the bulwarks *against* single-payer in the Senate at the time. Leftists begged him to seize the moment eight years ago, when Democrats enjoyed a filibuster-proof majority, and push Medicare for all. No dice, he said. The country’s not ready for it. It won’t pass and Democrats might get wiped out in the midterms for even trying. In the end they got wiped out in the midterms anyway and large chunks of the country do now appear to be ready for it — including Republicans, so long as the small matter of cost isn’t emphasized.

“I just think the time has come,” Baucus told NBC News Friday, after stunning healthcare observers earlier in the day by seemingly coming around on single-payer at a public forum. “Back in ’09, we were not ready to address it. It would never have passed. Here we are nine years later, I think it’s time to hopefully have a very serious good faith look at it.”…

“I started out by saying everything is on the table,” Baucus recalled. “But I did make an exception and that was single-payer. I said, nope, we’re not going to put single-payer on the table. Why? In my judgement, America was just not there … It’s branded as socialistic by too many people.”…

Baucus compared the issue’s evolution to that of gay rights. “It’s anathema for a long time, and then suddenly — acceptance,” he said.

Neil Cavuto Embarrasses Clueless Student

GATEWAY PUNDIT H/T

HotAir notes the following:

To cleanse the palate, via the Free Beacon, what I want to know is how this interview came about. Did her group actually … volunteer this person as their best spokesman for a one-on-one on fiscal policy with a business journalist? Or did one of Cavuto’s bookers meet her somewhere and realize that she’d make the perfect patsy for a segment aimed at showing how unmoored from economic reality Generation Bern is?

All I could think of watching this was Apollo Creed’s trainer screaming, “Throw the damn towel.”

Media Bias Is Not What You `Do` Report, But What You `Do Not` Report

Video Description:

[See video cross-posted here.] Media Research Center President Brent Bozell appeared with Fox News anchor Neil Cavuto to slam the “obnoxious” double standard in how journalists have covered Chris Christie’s traffic scandal in two days versus the scant number of stories on the IRS controversy over six months. According to Bozell, “It really goes to show you how out of control this left wing so-called news press is.” Cavuto explained, “The big three networks alone devoted 17 times more coverage to this story in one day, one day, than they devoted to the IRS scandal in six months.” A second analysis my the MRC finds the disparity is now up to 44-to-one. 

[See original MRC study here.]

Ted Cruz vs. Wendy Davis and `Media Bias 101`

Via Dylan Byers of Politico:

Sen. Ted Cruz has been speaking on the Senate floor for almost 19 hours, as of this post. The talk is not technically a filibuster — he can’t actually block the Senate from going about its business — but symbolically, it’s more or less the same thing. The point is to show one’s opposition to something through a demonstration of physical will.

Which is why you can forgive conservatives for being upset with the mainstream media’s coverage of the Cruz affair. When a Democrat like Texas state Sen. Wendy Davis filibusters against abortion restrictions, she is elevated to hero status, her tennis shoes become totems. When Cruz grandstands against Obamacare, he is a laughingstock in the eyes of many journalists on Twitter, an “embarrassment” in the eyes of The New York Times editorial board.

“Gee I wonder why NYT and WaPo and everyone else gave ecstatic coverage to Wendy Davis but not to Ted Cruz. I just can’t make sense of it!” John Podhoretz, the conservative columnist, tweeted on Wednesday morning.

Yes, the difference between filibustering and grandstanding plays a part. Equally important is the fact that Cruz’s theatrics are frustrating members of his own party. But, part of the disparity in coverage is due to the fact that the mainstream media, generally speaking, don’t admire Cruz the way they admired Davis — or rather, they admire him only insofar as he makes for tragicomic theater, whereas they admired her on the merits.

Cruz is portrayed in the media as “aimless and self-destructive” (NYT ed board), elitist (GQ) and likely guided more by presidential aspirations than principles (CNN). Josh Marshall, the editor and publisher of Talking Points Memo, had no qualms about coming right out and calling Cruz, his former Princeton colleague, an “arrogant jerk” — and worse.

These portrayals may be accurate or inaccuarate — Cruz certainly has an elitist strain and he certainly has political ambitions. But that’s not the point: The point is that the coverage of Cruz has been critical, and in some cases unforgiving, from the outset. At least initially, Davis wasn’t viewed through a critical lens at all. Her willingness to stand for 11 hours was evidence of the American dream in action. Period.

After Davis’s filibuster in June, she got a glowing Vogue profile and was interviewed by nearly every major network and show that deemed her the new superstar from the Lone Star. 

In an interview shortly after her filibuster in June, CBS News’s Charlie Rose highlighted Davis’s history.

“You’ve met tough things before in your life as single mother, one who went form community college, to TCU to Harvard Law School and back to practice law, so this seems to be another challenge for you,” Rose said.

Davis was the “Sunday Spotlight” for ABC’s This Week after the filibuster and was interviewed by Jeff Zeleny in the dinner theater where Davis once waitressed….