The “Sage from South Central” dismantles myth of the “angelic kid” other wise known as Trayvon Martin. Couple this with Bill Whittle’s destruction of the media myth (http://youtu.be/Ebu6Yvzs4Ls)… and you have a recipe for truth to come out. See also my blog post on the matter: http://tinyurl.com/knp3sxd
For more clear thinking like this from Larry Elder… I invite you to visit: http://www.larryelder.com/
Via The Blaze:
…Twenty-two of the network’s Cairo staff resigned on Monday. According to Gulf News, anchor Karem Mahmoud of Al Jazeera’s Mubasher Misr channel announced that the resignations were motivated by what he called “biased coverage” of the events leading up to the ouster of the Muslim Brotherhood-aligned former President Morsi.
The news anchor revealed that Al Jazeera management would instruct each staff member to favor the Muslim Brotherhood in their broadcasts. According to Gulf News, Mahmoud said that “there are instructions to us to telecast certain news”.
[….]
Sultan al-Qassemi, a widely-followed media commentator from the United Arab Emirates tells the Daily Star, “Al-Jazeera Arabic in 2011 was squarely on the side of the anti-government [anti-Mubarak] protesters, today the channel is notorious for being the mouthpiece of the Brotherhood party.”
Some other news Corps around town SHOULD be taking notes:
(Via Breitbart) Jeff Cohen has been all over cable news as a contributor, but for a time he worked as a senior producer for MSNBC. Monday, in the wake of the NSA spying scandal, Cohen lashed out at his former employer as the “official network of the Obama White House.”
When it comes to issues of U.S. militarism and spying, the allegedly “progressive” MSNBC often seems closer to the “official network of the Obama White House” than anything resembling an independent channel. With a few exceptions (especially Chris Hayes [10]), MSNBC has usually reacted to expanded militarism and surveillance by downplaying the abuses or defending them.
Had McCain or Romney defeated Obama and implemented the exact same policies, treating whistleblowers like Manning and Snowden as foreign espionage agents, one would expect MSNBC hosts to be loudly denouncing the Republican abuses of authority.
Cohen continues:
The World War I vintage Espionage Act, originally used to imprison socialists for making antiwar speeches, has been used by the administration against whistleblowers with a vengeance unprecedented in history: eight leakers have been charged with Espionage under Obama, compared to three under all previous presidents.
More than all other presidents! Let that sink in… that’s MSNBC, how bout NPR? Bernie Goldberg helps us with this question:
Maybe Nina wished Tony Snow would get cancer as retribution from “the Good Lord.”
…consider this statement made by the co-host of NPR’s On the Media:
“If you were to somehow poll the political orientation of everybody in the NPR news organization and all of the member stations, you would find an overwhelmingly progressive, liberal crowd.”
In the “overwhelmingly” liberal bubble that is NPR, executives were appalled at Juan Williams comment to Bill O’Reilly that ““When I get on a plane … if I see people who are in Muslim garb and I think, you know, they’re identifying themselves first and foremost as Muslims, I get worried, I get nervous.
This was so bigoted, in their view, that they had to fire Mr. Williams. In a statement explaining why they did it, NPR said: Williams’ words “were inconsistent with our editorial standards and practices, and undermined his credibility as a news analyst with NPR.”
But these same sensitive liberal souls let Nina Totenberg, NPR’s Legal Affairs correspondent, go on a Sunday talk show each week and spout all sorts of liberal nonsense. Who could forget her shot at then Senator Jesse Helms of North Carolina, a comment for which she later apologized. If there was “retributive justice,” in the world, Ms. Totenberg said, Jesse Helms would “get AIDS from a transfusion, or one of his grandchildren will get it.”
Inside the liberal bubble Juan Williams is a bigot. Nina Totenberg isn’t.
That’s one of the many reasons it matters if a newsroom is “overwhelmingly” liberal – or conservative.
Here are some other examples that Glenn Beck so astutely explains in 10-minutes:
Here are some examples — out of the many — from people like Dennis Prager, MRC’s montage of yearly examples, and Larry Elder’s example of Hollywood bias.
CBS reporter Elizabeth Palmer compares the Tea Party to the killer Iranian regime.
Spying, controlling the media, phone records of media and citezins, war cover-ups… this is all the stuff the left complained about during Bush. But are mum on Obama.
Via Breitbart:
Well, if it is Thursday there must be a new Obama scandal. But one thing is for damn sure, whatever that scandal is, you can bet the American mainstream media will be playing catch up and not carrying the glory of breaking a story about a major White House scandal.
Fact: Over the past few weeks, four major scandals have broken over the Obama administration, and it is a very sad (and frightening) truth that our pathetic, American, lapdog mainstream media is not responsible for breaking even a single one.
Left up to the media, we wouldn’t know anything about Libya. All of the media’s energy was collectively poured into ensuring the truth was never discovered.
Let’s not forget Gosnell:
No Different Than Westborough Baptist
Just what Savage feels he is accomplishing by using obscenity about the Bible at a journalism conference for high school students is beyond me. But what I do know is that the answers to homosexuality and faith do not lie either with religious haters like Fred Phelps who insult God by hating gays, nor with secular fanatics like Dan Savage who insult homosexuals by falsely portraying them as angry bigots. ~ RABBI SHMULEY BOTEACH
I wasn’t going to post on this, but, since the refutation of WaPo spread to the very leftist magazine, the New Republic, I will post NewsBusters pices on the topic.
One wonders — before posting the stories below — the outrage level WaPo would show if in the fictitious conversation taken from Savage’s book, were Jesus cussing about gays and the gay lifestyle WHILE putting Peter in his place, how “healing” the book would be considered. Will they ever use the term of books like What Is Marriage?: Man and Woman: A Defense, or, Clash Of Orthodoxies: Law Religion & Morality In Crisis? Somehow I doubt it. It is only “healing” when you expressly attack Christianity, I guess “salvation” in WaPo terms would be the gas chambers? But of course the Obama Admin supports this stuff with tax-payer funds.
First is the original post by by Tim Graham, followed by his follow up article noting the editorial from the left:
Preposterous: WashPost Claims Dan Savage Is All About ‘Healing’ and ‘Reconciliation’
The Washington Post occasionally must enjoy sounding completely preposterous. In a Tuesday book review, we’re told in the headlines that gay activist and sex columnist Dan Savage is “on a healing mission” and underneath his “wit,” he only “wants reconciliation.”
The Post doesn’t apparently require its book reviewers to read the book in question — or at least acknowledge what’s in it. You don’t have to go too far in the publisher’s online excerpt to find him condemning the Family Research Council as an “anti-gay hate group” and its leader Tony Perkins as “full of shit.” He laments the religious right this way:
Whenever someone asks me why the United States is such a mess about sex and everything that touches on sex—why the United States, out of all Western industrialized nations, will never stop fighting about abortion, sex education, birth control, the sex lives of politicians, the existence of gay people—I shrug and say, “Canada got the French, Australia got the convicts, the United States got the Puritans.” [Thank God!]
Can’t you feel the healing and reconciliation?
Here is the updated story:
The New Republic has easily demonstrated just how ridiculous The Washington Post’s book review of the new Dan Savage is to claim that “reconciliation is at the heart of everything Savage writes and says.”
In “The Waning Power of Dan Savage,” Daniel D’Addario dismisses the new book as “a very public act of self-love.” Later, he explained “The nadir of American Savage comes when Savage prints a one-act play called ‘Jesus and the Huge A–hole,’ about religious objectors to Obamacare.”
[….]
This sounds like a rerun of last October’s column attacking conservative Christian blogger and activist Peter LaBarbera, who had tweeted about the founder of Jimmy John’s sandwich shops saying Obamacare would cost him 50 cents a sandwich:
JESUS: “You are an asshole.”
PETER: “Excuse me, Jesus?”
JESUS: “Are you deaf? I said, ‘YOU ARE AN ASSHOLE.’ You’re seriously standing there bitching about having to pay a little bit more for a sandwich?”
PETER: “You don’t understand, Jesus, why should I have to pay for—”
JESUS: “Shut the fuck up. I was crucified for your sins and all I asked in return was for you people to be nice to each other—”
PETER: “But—”
JESUS: “Shut the fuck up, Peter. All I asked was for your people to be nice to each other. And you’re telling me that you’re not willing to pay fifty cents more for a fucking sandwich so that the guy who made it for you—and his kids—can go see a doctor? You’re not a Christian.”
PETER: “But I go to church, Jesus, and I hate gay people so hard!”
JESUS: “Not good enough, Peter, not nearly good enough. Stop bothering me and go worship Thor or Mars or Zeus instead, okay? I don’t want you calling yourself a Christian. You’re a dick.”
PETER: “I can’t believe Jesus just called me a dick.”
JESUS: “Yeah, well, you are a dick. I sacrificed my life for you and you can’t sacrifice a bag of chips for the sandwich guy? Or scrounge up the extra fifty fucking cents? Dick.”
PETER: “But Jesus!”
JESUS: “Love one another as I have loved you, do unto others as you would have them do unto you, take care of the poor, take care of the sick, give away all that you have and follow me—does any of this shit ring a bell, you stupid asshole?”
PETER: “Okay! Okay! I’m sorry! I’ll go worship Thor!”
In fact, the above shows that it is sooo “politically-correct” in the rooms at the Washington Post that one couldn’t even mention in the review that this (the above) was not healing. Freedom of press? Yeah right!
Here is more “Dan Savage ‘healing'”
This via WUWT:
Junkscience.com reports this is what the print copy looks like today for this article by Eugene Robinson. Note what looks like black unfiltered pollutants spewing skyward [is steam]
This is what it looks like during the day, in color, with the sun light coming from another direction (to the right).
Again, this is steam!
Which reminds me of a great article I wish to recommend — it is only 25-cents for Pete’s Sake (here) — in which it’s author Charles Cooke recounts seeing the infamous seven chimneys seen in many documentaries by activist environmentalists:
After half an hour’s drive, the incessant stretch of virgin land comes to an end and, over the shallow hills, we see white smoke billowing into the sky. A few more miles and an industrial plant comes into view. Against the green-and-white landscape, it is a shock. I recognize it immediately as belonging to heavy-oil giant Syncrude, and as the favorite subject of the myriad anti-oil-sands photographs that are currently circulating around the Web. It is without doubt an ugly thing to see amid so much beauty, and the Tolkienesque distaste for the “scouring” of the countryside that informs the “green” zeitgeist is born of a noble instinct. Yet not all is what it seems. To a layman, the seven sets of white clouds look baleful, but, I learn, six of these chimneys are emitting just harmless steam. Our host, Cheryl Robb, jokes that she prefers conducting summer tours because then “the steam is invisible.” She gives us the details of an ongoing $1.6 billion project that will reduce the emissions from the one offending chimney by 60 percent. (National Review, “The Quite Gold Rush,” by Charles C. W. Cooke)
It’s all about perspectives… one is a misuse of lighting and facts, the other is more honest.
In the article, Eugine Robinson laments a Co2 milestone than WUWT makes a point that even Al Gore called for a solemn day of prayer over:
Al Gore calls for a day of prayer and reflection, and bothering your neighbor:
So please, take this day and the milestone it represents to reflect on the fragility of our civilization and and the planetary ecosystem on which it depends. Rededicate yourself to the task of saving our future. Talk to your neighbors, call your legislator, let your voice be heard. We must take immediate action to solve this crisis. Not tomorrow, not next week, not next year. Now.
Shirts are available:
However, the PPM were revised, much to the chagrin of the religious believers (beliebers?) like Al Gore:
It seems we didn’t reach 400PPM last week after all. The data has been revised. Ooops.
‘Carbon dioxide measurements in the Earth’s atmosphere did not break the symbolic milestone of 400 parts per million at a Hawaiian observatory last week, according to a revised reading from the nation’s climate observers.
The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) revised its May 9 reading at the Mauna Loa observatory in Hawaii, saying it remained fractions of a point below the level of 400 ppm, at 399.89′
Source: LA Times
Oh well, there’s always next week…or maybe not, since spring in the Northern Hemisphere tends to reduce CO2 as plants suck up all that CO2 that some claim is not plant food.
I remember all the hub-bub by the press (and bloggers) about Cronyism, Nepotism, and the like by the press about the Bush administration. But the press looking at the “plank” in their eye? Pisha!
Via Atlas Shrugs:
Top Obama official’s brother is president of CBS News, may drop reporter over “aggressive” Benghazi coverage (thanks to Robert Spencer)
Sharyl Attkisson should know the basic rule of American journalism: do not investigate scandals perpetrated by Leftist presidents. Instead, cover them up. “Top Obama official’s brother is president of CBS News, may drop reporter over Benghazi coverage,” by Patrick Howley in the Daily Caller, May 11:
The brother of a top Obama administration official is also the president of CBS News, and the network may be days away from dropping one of its top investigative reporters for covering the administration’s scandals too aggressively.CBS News executives have reportedly expressed frustration with their own reporter, Sharyl Attkisson, who has steadily covered the Obama administration’s handling of the Benghazi terrorist attack in Libya since late last year.
“Network sources” told Politico Wednesday that CBS executives feel Attkisson’s Benghazi coverage is bordering on advocacy, and Attkisson “can’t get some of her stories on the air.”
Attkisson, who is in talks to leave the network before her contract expires, has been attempting to figure out who changed the Benghazi talking points for more than five months.
“We still don’t know who changed talking points but have had at least 4 diff explanations so far,” Attkisson tweeted on November 27, 2012.
But on Friday, ABC News reported that the Benghazi talking points went through 12 revisions before they were used on the public. The White House was intimately involved in that process, ABC reported, and the talking points were scrubbed free of their original references to a terror attack.
That reporting revealed that President Obama’s deputy national security advisor, Ben Rhodes — brother of CBS News president David Rhodes — was instrumental in changing the talking points in September 2012.