…(read more)…
Here is part of an article by Trevor Loudon entitled, “Socialist ‘JournoListas’.” It is a very imprtant aspect of the JournoList (JourNOlist) story. For all the links out and emphasis on persons and writing, please read Trevor’s post… it is very important!
JournoList was not just a bunch of “liberal’ journos with too much time on their hands.
It was a network of high level opinion makers, united by a “progressive” vision for America. They believed that their superior judgment and insight obligated them to present Americans with a view of reality that they would be too stupid and reactionary to grasp unaided.
At least a few, perhaps many, were committed Marxists who saw journalism, not as a profession, but as a revolutionary tool.
This disgraceful episode should dispel forever the “progressive” lie that the American MainStreamMedia and its “liberal” core, can be trusted to uphold the objective standards of their profession.
Here is part of an article by Trevor Loudon entitled, “Socialist ‘JournoListas’.” It is a very imprtant aspect of the JournoList (JourNOlist) story:
The now closed down JournoList, has caused considerable controversy in recent weeks. According to its opponents, JournoList teamed up some 400 prominent “progressive” journalists in an effort to smooth Barack Obama’s path to the White House.
There have been accusations that “Journolitstas,” deliberately sought to downplay Obama’s association with the Marxist Rev. Jeremiah Wright and tried to smear conservatives or opposing journalists as “racists.”
This post looks at 106 reported “Journolistas” to look for connections or common threads.
Of the known “Jounolistas” and organizations listed below, many can be linked back to two interrelated groups Democratic Socialists of America, the U.S.’s largest Marxist-based organization and the D.S.A.’s “brain,” the Washington DC-based, far left “think tank,” the Institute for Policy Studies.
Between them, D.S.A. and the I.P.S. dominate or influence several organizations affiliated to JournoList, including:
Apart from the D.S.A./I.P.S. connections, leftist institutions like The New Republic and the New Century Foundation are well represented. There are two known connections to George Soros‘ Open Society Institute.
Many major newspapers are also represented, as is national public radio, CNN and a host of leading “progressive” blogs and websites and leftist media “watchdog” Media Matters.
…(read more)…
Today, in 1866 (July 30th), the Democratic government in New Orleans ordered a raid on a racially integrated meeting of the Republican Party. 40 people were killed and 150 were injured. Remember. (BREAITBART)
AMERICAN COWBOY CHRONICLES has this:
….While it was also known as the New Orleans Race Riot, the New Orleans Massacre of 1866 took place on July 30th of that year. What became a massacre took place when white Democrats attacked Republicans outside the Mechanics Institute in New Orleans. The Democrats were made up of former Confederate soldiers, and members of the local police and fire department, as well as others. The Republicans were whites, but mostly “freedmen” — that is freed black men and former slaves.
It started when the Republicans in Louisiana called for a state constitutional convention because they were angry over the Democrat controlled state legislature enacting Black Codes. Among other things, Black Codes enabled state officials to refuse black men the ability to vote. through their .
Black Codes were laws passed by former Confederate states in 1865 and 1866. The intent of the Black Codes was to restrict the freedoms of blacks, while forcing newly “freedmen” to work in low wage labor jobs that were akin to “slave labor.”
[….]
The marchers were beaten on the spot. Soon shots rang out as the marchers where shot in cold blood. Yes, some attempting to flee. The ones who fled were chased and beaten and killed. Some of the marchers made it inside the building. Yes, they made it inside the building thinking there would be safety in the building.
Then the unthinkable happened. Monroe’s group surrounded the Institute and immediately opened fire on those in the building. Shooting into the windows at anyone they could see, the attackers then rushed into the building. Once inside, the Democrat attackers kept firing into the crowd of Republican delegates. They unleashed such a barrage of gunfire on those in there that they literally ran out of ammunition.
Out of ammunition, they were soon beaten back by the delegates. While the Republican delegates thought the worst was over, it wasn’t. The Democrats ran out away from the building, but little did those inside know that they simply regrouped, rearmed, found more ammunition, and returned. This time they broke down the doors, only to again resume shooting the mostly unarmed Republican delegates inside.
It’s said that when the shooting first started, some of the delegates actually attempted to surrender. Most of those who surrendered were blacks, and they were summarily shot and killed on the spot. Others fled in panic and the Democrats actually chased them down to kill them. That’s the reason that the killings were spread over a several block area around the Institute. Victims were being chased down the streets. That’s how innocent blacks were shot and killed even though they were not connected to the convention. Blacks were shot on the street, and they were pulled off of streetcars, and from hiding places to be beaten or killed.
Louisiana Republicans wanted to extend the suffrage, the right to vote, to freedmen and completely eliminate the Black Codes. In the end, they reconvened the convention and succeeded in achieving their goals — but at a price……..
In this linked post, there are many comments, but the one that caught my eye was a long one that ended with this:
….BE PROUD TO BE WHITE!\
It’s not a crime YET…. but getting very close!
To which I replied:
Growing up in Detroit as a honkey, I can say that I am not proud to be white, like I believe people shouldn’t be proud to be brown, or black. Coming from a background of three-felonies and a life redeemed through Christ, these “pride in one’s color” are nothing but mild racism. I am proud to be an American. I am proud to be a Christian in the Judeo-Christian Western culture sense. These types of pride incorporate black, white, brown, etc. Having “pride in your color” is kowtowing to the multi-cultural metanarrative that has divided our country since its inception in the 1920’s and the “Fabian Socialist” [anti-capitalists/anti-religionists] insertion of it into our schools via progressive secularism. This is a battle of worldviews, and taking pride in one’s skin-color is using a worldview that is anathema to the Judeo-Christian one (Genesis chapters 1-3; Mathew 19:4-6; and Acts 17:26). You should see the first 7-minutes or so of my “documentary” and understand the battle of the views of nature involved: Obamacon – Twenty Years In A Racist Church
Chris Matthews is right, by the way (is Hell frozen over??), Shirley’s whole story of redemption was included in the original video. (see my video posted July 19th – its Breitbart’s release).
Also note that FoxNews didn’t talk about this story until the White House had already moved on it, which Chris Matthews points out. Anderson Cooper admitting? Bravo.
On Thursday’s Anderson Cooper 360, anchor Anderson Cooper faulted himself for not pressing Shirley Sherrod when she appeared on the show back on July 22 and claimed that conservative Andrew Breitbart was a “vicious” racist who “would like to get us stuck back in the times of slavery.”
Cooper now says he should have challenged Sherrod to support such an inflammatory charge with facts: “I believe in admitting my mistakes….I didn’t challenge her that night and I should have.”
[….]
COOPER: I interviewed Shirley Sherrod last Thursday. And in the course of that interview, I failed to do something that I should have. I believe in admitting my mistakes. I looked at the interview again today, and Ms. Sherrod said during that interview that she thought Mr. Breitbart was a racist. She said, quote, “I think he would like to get us stuck back in the times of slavery.” She went on to say she believed his opposition to President Obama was based on racism. Now, she, of course, is free to believe whatever she wants, but I didn’t challenge her that night and I should have.
I don’t want anyone on my show to get away with saying things which cannot be supported by facts. I should have challenged her on what facts she believes supports that accusation. That’s my job, and I didn’t do it very well in that interview, and I’m sorry about it. If I get a chance to talk to her again, I will.
…(read more)… Here is Dennis Prager on the issue:
Prager Discusses the Race Card and Howard Deans Use of It from Papa Giorgio on Vimeo.
Take note that the persons opposed to tanning altogether are the ones who got this 10% tax added. They know that even a 10% tax (just like all the taxes added to smoking) dissuades someone from that action. Similarly, all the taxes coming down the pike will do what exactly to consumers wanting to go out and spend??
In one scene, Snooki — with her impressively orange tan — broke the shocking news that she’s been staying away from her home away from home: Tanning salons.
“I don’t go tanning anymore because Obama put a 10% tax on tanning. McCain would never put a 10% tax on tanning. Because he’s pale and would probably want to be tan,” she said.
Snooki was referring to a provision in the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act that mandates tanning salons impose a 10 percent tax on UV-ray sessions.
McCain and Jersey Shore team up. Why would a President who is concerned about jobs and people (supposedly) put a 10% on small business owners that would do nothing but hinder job growth. Many of his policies hinder this.