A Look At Barack Obama And More Old Media Bias

It's still too early to tell who the candidates are going to be for each party in the Presidential election. But we can take a look at who the current presumed front-runner for the Dems: Barack Hussein Obama.

I was watching Glenn Beck last night and he posed a question to three political commentators about B. Hussein Obama: "Specifically, which of his policies do you like best?" Not one single commentator could come up with a specific reason.

So, maybe we should start looking into this ourselves. I found this item by Dennis Prager at Town Hall about the "call for unity" Obama made:

I do not doubt Mr. Obama's sincerity. The wish that all people be united is an elemental human desire. But there are two major problems with it. First, it is not truly honest. Second, it is childish. First is its dishonesty. Virtually all calls for unity -- whether national, international or religious (as in calls for Christian unity) -- do not tell the whole truth. If those who call for unity told the whole truth, this is what they would say: "I want everyone to unite -- behind my values. I want everyone who disagrees with me to change the way they think so that we can all be united. I myself have no plans to change my positions on any important issues in order to achieve this unity. So in order to achieve it, I assume that all of you who differ with me will change your views and values and embrace mine."

But what are his values? What does he really believe? That is what Glenn Beck was trying to get the commentators to answer but no one would say.

Dennis goes on:

Barack Obama wants American troops out of Iraq now. About half of America believes that American troops abandoning Iraq will lead to making that country the world's center of terror and to the greatest victory thus far for the greatest organized evil in the world today. How, then, will Mr. Obama achieve unity on Iraq? Mr. Obama believes in repealing the tax cuts enacted by the Bush administration. How will he achieve unity on that? Many of us believe that re-raising taxes will bring on a recession.

And this:

For nearly eight years the media and Democrats have labeled President Bush's policies "divisive" simply because they don't agree with them. They are not one whit more divisive than Sen. Obama's positions. A question for Democrats, the media and other Obama supporters: How exactly are Mr. Obama's left-wing political positions any less "divisive" than President Bush's right-wing positions? Second, the craving for unity is frequently childish. As we mature we understand that decent people will differ politically and theologically. The mature yearn for unity only on a handful of fundamental values, such as: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." Beyond such basics, we yearn for civil discourse and tolerance, not unity. The next time Sen. Obama speaks with his usual passion and eloquence about his desire to unite Americans, someone must ask him two questions: Why are your left-wing positions any less divisive than President Bush's right-wing positions?

That is the question that leftists in Old Media will never ask for fear of the answer.

You can access the complete column on-line here:

Sen. Obama's Calls for Unity Are Not What They Seem
Dennis Prager
TownHall.com
January 8, 2008

---

And how much proof do you need to come to the realization that Old Media has a leftist slant and bias in its coverage? How about ABC's Good Morning America which gave a full fifteen minutes of coverage to the Dem campaign but only 31 seconds to the GOP?

From NewsBusters.org:

Over the course of the two hour program, GMA featured four segments on the Democrats and only a solitary (and brief) piece on the GOP contest. This included co-host Diane Sawyer interviewing Barack Obama twice. ABC anchor and former Bill Clinton operative George Stephanopoulos talked to Senator Hillary Clinton. Kate Snow discussed the state of the New York senator's White House bid. Aside from mentioning the latest GOP polls in the show's intro, the only analysis of the Republicans resulted from Sawyer asking Stephanopoulos this banal question: "And what about the Republicans?" The conversation that followed lasted 31 seconds.

The really sad part is that ABC thinks we were too stupid to notice.

You can access the complete article on-line here:

ABC's GMA Devotes 15 Minutes To Dem Race; 31 seconds To GOP
Scott Whitlock
NewsBusters.org
January 7, 2008

Liberal Media Demoralizing America And A Gay Man Invites Sex Offenders To Live With Him

This should come as no surprise to those of you who have been following the demise of Old Media. It makes perfect sense though. Leftist newsreaders in Old Media have for years been pushing their agendas rather than reporting accurately and objectively.

Michael P. Tremoglie, writing for the Bulletin in Philadelphia, gives us some really good insights on this:

There is a disputed quote, attributed to North Vietnamese General Võ Nguyên Giáp, which states the American military would have won the Vietnam War were it not for the efforts of the American media to demoralize the nation. Giap purportedly wrote, "What we still don't understand is why you Americans stopped the bombing of Hanoi. ... We were ready to surrender! ... We knew it, and we thought you knew it. But we were elated to notice your media was definitely helping us. They were causing more disruption in America than we could in the battlefields."

But the modern evidence is even more damning:

Recently, the esteemed magazine The New Republic (TNR) published a series of articles, by a soldier serving in Iraq, who claimed he witnessed misconduct by his fellow soldiers. He described horrible incidents such as insulting a disfigured woman, abusing corpses and being cruel to animals. "Conservative" bloggers and the "conservative" media disputed the accounts. Yet, TNR defended the articles. Even after an internal investigation by the military revealed that there was no truth to them, TNR still maintained their validity. They even claimed, in an Aug. 7 statement, that they spoke to military personnel who corroborated the articles. Finally, after months of denial, TNR issued a statement: "After months of intensive re-reporting, we cannot be confident that the events in [the soldier's] pieces occurred in exactly the manner that he described them. Without that essential confidence, we cannot stand by these stories."

But, leftist newsreaders have always been ready to stand by anti-American characters throughout the world:

Eason Jordan, CNN's chief news executive, resigned after he remarked, in 2005, that American soldiers in Iraq targeted journalists. Mr. Jordan, it seems, was more inclined to falsely report American atrocities than he was to truthfully report Iraqi atrocities since, in 2003, he admitted to withholding information about atrocities committed by Saddam Hussein. The Boston Globe published photos of American soldiers allegedly raping Iraqi women in 2004. The story was false. The photos were common pornography. Then there was the case of Jesse MacBeth, who claimed to be an Army Ranger and Iraq veteran. He said he committed and witnessed atrocities while serving in Iraq. Later it was learned that MacBeth had never been in Iraq. Of course, his accusations were already circulating by that time. During 2004 and 2005 The Associated Press, which provides articles for thousands of newspapers and radio news broadcasts, published atrocity stories by former Marine Staff Sgt. Jimmy Massey, an Iraq war veteran. These too were later proven to be false.

Old Media, in most cases, should not be trusted to police themselves nor to vet their own stories.

You can access the complete column on-line here:

Disinformatsya: How Liberal Media Attempts To Demoralize America
Michael P. Tremoglie
The Bulletin
December 13, 2007

---

And how militant can homosexual activists become? How about militant enough to offer rooms to murderers and sex offenders? That is what is happening down in Dog River, Alabama where a homosexual activist is threatening to open his doors to sex offenders who may want to rent a room in his house.

From WKRG, Channel 5 CBS affiliate:

Attention sex offenders and murderers: Do you need a place to live? A Dog River couple is getting ready to rent out rooms. They say people in their neighborhood are trying to get rid of them and its payback time. You can't miss the FOR RENT signs. They're posted in the yard and the trees! Bobby White says he's fed up with the neighbors. "I will be here renting out rooms to sex offenders and ex-murderers and ex-thieves! They forced me into this as long as they are not on parole or on paper. I can rent out rooms to whoever I like." ... Their Dog River neighbors like Eleni Tyler says that the signs just popped up one day. "They've got signs up and I'm having to explain to my daughter what this means. The neighborhood is extremely upset about it." It's no secret that Ham was convicted of a sex crime in 1990. Everyone got the notice. Tyler claims an inappropriate comment was made to her 11-year old daughter. "They were cat calling her Hey Baby and their excuse was they were looking for their dog." White says the couple wanted to move but they can't do that either. He says the real estate agents have been harassed too "If they want us to leave so bad, leave our real estate alone." News 5's Tiffany Craig says, "That doesn't make sense! If they don't want you here why would they mess up the selling house process?" White replies, "I have no idea."

White's claim in that last paragraph does seem to be contradictory, doesn't it?

You can access the complete story on-line here:

Sex Offenders And Murderers Welcome
Tiffany Craig
WKRG Channel 5
December 11, 2007

More CNN YouTube Plants Being Uncovered And Glenn Beck At #1

You have to wonder if CNN was just completely ignorant, or completely stupid as to how they handled the GOP YouTube Primary Debate. Those are the two choices and there is no third option.

If CNN was completely ignorant, then they really didn't know that several of the "undecided" voters posing questions to the field of GOP candidates were actually plants from the Democrats' various campaigns because the staff at CNN was too dumb/lazy/incompetent to research and expose them as such. (Bloggers and other New Media institutions got to the truth within mere minutes of the plants appearing in the debate.)

If CNN was completely stupid, then they did know that those "undecided" voters were plants but chose to try and hide that fact in the hopes that you and I wouldn't be sharp enough to catch it. (I saw something wrong from having watched only fifteen minutes of the debate.)

Well, we've found more two "undecided" voters who were plants in the debate.

From Michelle Malkin:

Surprise: Muslim YouTube Questioner Was Former CAIR Intern
Michelle Malkin
MichelleMalkin.com
November 29, 2007

From Ray Robinson over at the American Thinker:

Another questioner named Mark Strauss of Iowa asked Ron Paul to run as an Independent. Wasn't it a little bit of a tip off to CNN producers that Strauss is not interested in Republican issues when his question was nothing more than an encouragement for a candidate to leave the party? But clearly, CNN likes the idea of a Republican candidate taking Republican voters to the Independent block for the general election. In case you missed it, Nader did this to Gore and Gore lost. Perot did it to Bush, Sr. and Bush lost. Wonder what CNN might have had in mind by promoting this idea at the debate and selecting it out of thousands of questions that actually would have mattered to Republicans? Strauss was not randomly chosen as CNN presented a previous video of his at the Democrats' debate. There is a history between him and CNN. So the "we did not know" defense shouldn't play here any more than it does in the case of Gen. Kerr who had been on CNN previously.

In fact, Strauss has his own website where he wrote (very poorly) the following:

In October 2006, Governor Mitt Romney of Massachusetts came to my door in Iowa, yes, at my house. He was there walking up and down the street with Robby Smith campaigning with him. Man, did he pick the wrong door. What is the Governor of MA doing in IA, with a young rookie running for state house? He is a Republican first-American second...hopefully not our next "decider". ... Mitt asked me what I woud [sic] do in Iraq. I proceeded to explain how we need to get not only the effected nations in the region involved, but strike meaningful discussion and secure true resilution [sic] with the world thru the U.N.. Mitt laughed and called the U.N. a joke. This is the man that wants to be President. Don't we already have a decider in office that considers the other world leaders a joke? I then said "I have no use for you, get off my property", and I closed the door. This guy cannot be elected into office in 08.

Clearly, Strauss was not "undecided" and CNN either knew it, or ignored it. One or the other. But they had knowledge of it.

You can access Mr. Robinson's complete article on-line here:

CNN/YouTube Questioner Kicked Romney 'Off My Property'
Ray Robinson
The American Thinker
November 30, 2007

As a result of all this, CNN should be banned from ever hosting a debate ever again.

From Noel Sheppard at NewsBusters:

In the greatest of ironies, after Democrats refused to participate in debates sponsored by Fox News due to its supposed partiality, CNN has now shown itself in back-to-back debates to be as biased as biased can be. After either participating in or allowing the planting of campaign operatives at November 15's Democrat presidential debate in Las Vegas, it has now become apparent that similar stocking of audience questioners occurred in Wednesday's Republican debate. ... Regardless of whether or not CNN is specifically involved, as this is now the second consecutive incident of such behavior at a debate sponsored by this network, has it now abused the public trust enough to not be allowed to sponsor any more debates in this election cycle?

As I said, either stupid or ignorant. Take your pick.

You can access the complete column on-line here:

Should CNN Be Allowed To Host Any More Debates?
Noel Sheppard
NewsBusters.org
November 29, 2007

---

Glenn Beck has a new book out entitled An Inconvenient Book. Catchy, eh? But the title is not what I'm interested in here. I am interested in the book's rank on the New York Times Bestseller list. It is #1.

So, you may ask, what of it? Well, NewsMax made a very interesting observation about Beck's book and the previous #1, I Am America (And So Can You) by leftist liberal Stephen Colbert. You see, Colbert had all sorts of publicity, interviews and book reviews with Old Media in order to get his book to #1. Beck had none of that, but still went to #1. What does that say about the differences between Old Media and New Media?

From NewsMax:

Radio and TV talk show host Glenn Beck’s new book has soared to the number one spot on the New York Times bestseller list — despite the fact it has been totally ignored by the mainstream press. Beck’s “An Inconvenient Book: Real Solutions to the World’s Biggest Problems” (Simon & Schuster) will appear the Times’ list of Hardcover Nonfiction bestsellers that will appear on December 9. The book is already the No. 1 best-seller among all books on Amazon.com. Before Beck’s book hit the top of the Times’ list, Stephen Colbert’s “I Am America (And So Can You)” had been the leader in the Hardcover Nonfiction category for six weeks. But unlike Beck, the liberal Colbert enjoyed considerable attention from the mainstream press. His book was reviewed by, or he was interviewed by, the Times, USA Today, the Los Angeles Times, the Washington Post, the Boston Globe, Entertainment Weekly, “Good Morning America,” “Meet the Press,” and David Letterman.

That is a serious question. What does this say about the differences between Old Media and New Media?

You can access the complete article on-line here:

Glenn Beck Hits No. 1 On New York Times List
NewsMax.com
November 29, 2007