1 when the snow recedes, I will find a new stick. My old stick is decrepit. ItÂ’s cracked, it has lichen, the end I wrap in flaming kerosene-soaked rags is misshapen. Embarrassing. All IÂ’m saying is, next time we forge a bloodthirsty mob, donÂ’t judge me by my old stick. IÂ’m as angry as the next man, and so help me god my new stick will reflect this.

2 If there are ANY big newspapers that are in the pocket of the Republicans I have never seen them. Even the small town papers here are Democrat PR organizations.

hat is my problem with them. Newspapers have always been partisen, but in the early days they were evenly divided. Not so much anymore.

That also includes TV news.

3 So the question to be debated is "are the news organizations of today practicing yellow journalism?".

The newspapers are like they have always been, except they are all in the pocket of the Dems. I would say that they are not like the papers of the old day. The only stories they push are the ones that further the Dem Party and liberals.

However, the TV news is vastly different. They ARE sensationalist to the extreme.  They try to push liberal agendas but in the event that a sensational story comes about they will exploit it to the max even at the expense of the Dems, in some cases. (Fox).  (The otrher networks stay on the Dems regardless. They will lose money if necessary)

4 The difference is that those that have embraced capitalism are no longer drawn to media (except radio) because of the bullshit degrees that you need to get from uber-liberal universities.  There is no longer big money in newspapers, and the networks are public.

5 I had to turn to NBC this morning to see if local schools were delayed or closed.

The congresswoman was able to hold up 2 fingers.
Matt Lauer says:   "Was it the peace sign?  We dont know."

I am sure she is a lovely woman and I hope she fully recovers but .. the woman was shot in the head, lucky to be alive.. she probably is never going to be the same.
She has no idea the media attention.. I doubt she is thinking politics at all. She more than likely in and out of conciousness. 
Now.. Matt Lauer in an attempt to turn this woman into a Saint.. makes it sound like she is telling the world.. "peace".

6 Racist.

/s

7 Dumbfuck Matt Lauer's answer to everything should be "We don't know".

8 6:

You know why the reports mention that she can hold up two fingers? BECAUSE SHE CAN'T HOLD UP THE OTHER THREE.

The idea that it's because she was giving a "peace sign" is absurd. Mat Lauer is a douche with a bad haircut.

9 Matt Lauer? Never heard of him.

10 What is most troubling about today's media and the elite Left is that they really do believe that people on the right are ignorant and violence-prone ("they cling to guns or religion," in the words of their chief spokesmen}. The blaming of the Tea Party movement for acts of violence is not calculated as much as it is a natural impulse that grows out of this perception. In contrast, they perceive Islam as the religion of peace, and hence they are constantly surprised by the violence that its adherents perpetrate. They clamor for a more civil dialogue and do not realize that a more civil dialog is impossible given that they do not consider opposition legitimate. What they really want is for those who disagree with them stay silent.

11 I'd also like to see any evidence of the media repeating RNC talking points.  Hell, I'd like to see some evidence of RNC talking points.

12 I was just ranting in the ONT about the failed business model of the Post Office. The MFM is actually in the same boat, but at least we the taxpayers won't have to bail them out. Prior to Nov. 2010, I couldn't have stated that with any confidence.
 
This last week's media debacle will only hasten the slide.

13 Red journalism? Like the term!

5 The difference is that those that have embraced capitalism are no longer drawn to media (except radio) because of the bullshit degrees that you need to get from uber-liberal universities.  There is no longer big money in newspapers, and the networks are public.

There's at least some truth to this.  Its funny when the libs talk about the "corporist media", because if the MFM was primarily concerned with their bottom line, they would have dropped the bias a long time ago.

Also, the caliber of people entering journalism isn't very high these days.  Journalism majors are foremost concerned with "changing the world" (as they see fit) instead of reporting current events accurately and with an eye towards impartiality. 

14 Sarah Palin has release a statement:

Like millions of Americans I learned of the tragic events in Arizona on Saturday, and my heart broke for the innocent victims. No words can fill the hole left by the death of an innocent, but we do mourn for the victimsÂ’ families as we express our sympathy. 

I agree with the sentiments shared yesterday at the beautiful Catholic mass held in honor of the victims. The mass will hopefully help begin a healing process for the families touched by this tragedy and for our country.

Our exceptional nation, so vibrant with ideas and the passionate exchange and debate of ideas, is a light to the rest of the world. Congresswoman Giffords and her constituents were exercising their right to exchange ideas that day, to celebrate our RepublicÂ’s core values and peacefully assemble to petition our government. ItÂ’s inexcusable and incomprehensible why a single evil man took the lives of peaceful citizens that day. 

There is a bittersweet irony that the strength of the American spirit shines brightest in times of tragedy. We saw that in Arizona. We saw the tenacity of those clinging to life, the compassion of those who kept the victims alive, and the heroism of those who overpowered a deranged gunman.

Like many, IÂ’ve spent the past few days reflecting on what happened and praying for guidance. After this shocking tragedy, I listened at first puzzled, then with concern, and now with sadness, to the irresponsible statements from people attempting to apportion blame for this terrible event.

President Reagan said, “We must reject the idea that every time a lawÂ’s broken, society is guilty rather than the lawbreaker. It is time to restore the American precept that each individual is accountable for his actions.” Acts of monstrous criminality stand on their own. They begin and end with the criminals who commit them, not collectively with all the citizens of a state, not with those who listen to talk radio, not with maps of swing districts used by both sides of the aisle, not with law-abiding citizens who respectfully exercise their First Amendment rights at campaign rallies, not with those who proudly voted in the last election.

The last election was all about taking responsibility for our countryÂ’s future. President Obama and I may not agree on everything, but I know he would join me in affirming the health of our democratic process. Two years ago his party was victorious. Last November, the other party won. In both elections the will of the American people was heard, and the peaceful transition of power proved yet again the enduring strength of our Republic.

Vigorous and spirited public debates during elections are among our most cherished traditions.  And after the election, we shake hands and get back to work, and often both sides find common ground back in D.C. and elsewhere. If you donÂ’t like a personÂ’s vision for the country, youÂ’re free to debate that vision. If you donÂ’t like their ideas, youÂ’re free to propose better ideas. But, especially within hours of a tragedy unfolding, journalists and pundits should not manufacture a blood libel that serves only to incite the very hatred and violence they purport to condemn. That is reprehensible.

There are those who claim political rhetoric is to blame for the despicable act of this deranged, apparently apolitical criminal. And they claim political debate has somehow gotten more heated just recently. But when was it less heated? Back in those “calm days” when political figures literally settled their differences with dueling pistols? In an ideal world all discourse would be civil and all disagreements cordial. But our Founding Fathers knew they werenÂ’t designing a system for perfect men and women. If men and women were angels, there would be no need for government. Our FoundersÂ’ genius was to design a system that helped settle the inevitable conflicts caused by our imperfect passions in civil ways. So, we must condemn violence if our Republic is to endure.

As I said while campaigning for others last March in Arizona during a very heated primary race, “We know violence isnÂ’t the answer. When we ‘take up our armsÂ’, weÂ’re talking about our vote.” Yes, our debates are full of passion, but we settle our political differences respectfully at the ballot box – as we did just two months ago, and as our Republic enables us to do again in the next election, and the next. ThatÂ’s who we are as Americans and how we were meant to be. Public discourse and debate isnÂ’t a sign of crisis, but of our enduring strength. It is part of why America is exceptional. 

No one should be deterred from speaking up and speaking out in peaceful dissent, and we certainly must not be deterred by those who embrace evil and call it good. And we will not be stopped from celebrating the greatness of our country and our foundational freedoms by those who mock its greatness by being intolerant of differing opinion and seeking to muzzle dissent with shrill cries of imagined insults.

Just days before she was shot, Congresswoman Giffords read the First Amendment on the floor of the House. It was a beautiful moment and more than simply “symbolic,” as some claim, to have the Constitution read by our Congress. I am confident she knew that reading our sacred charter of liberty was more than just “symbolic.” But less than a week after Congresswoman Giffords reaffirmed our protected freedoms, another member of Congress announced that he would propose a law that would criminalize speech he found offensive.

It is in the hour when our values are challenged that we must remain resolved to protect those values. Recall how the events of 9-11 challenged our values and we had to fight the tendency to trade our freedoms for perceived security. And so it is today.

Let us honor those precious lives cut short in Tucson by praying for them and their families and by cherishing their memories. Let us pray for the full recovery of the wounded. And let us pray for our country. In times like this we need GodÂ’s guidance and the peace He provides. We need strength to not let the random acts of a criminal turn us against ourselves, or weaken our solid foundation, or provide a pretext to stifle debate.

America must be stronger than the evil we saw displayed last week. We are better than the mindless finger-pointing we endured in the wake of the tragedy. We will come out of this stronger and more united in our desire to peacefully engage in the great debates of our time, to respectfully embrace our differences in a positive manner, and to unite in the knowledge that, though our ideas may be different, we must all strive for a better future for our country. May God bless America.

- Sarah Palin

She's also release a video version too.

http://tinyurl.com/4s6337d

15 What they really want is for those who disagree with them stay silent.
Posted by: nohype at January 12, 2011 07:40 AM

Exactly right.  Fortunately, we are not under any obligation to comply with their request.  I have no plans to participate in my own demise.

16 It should be called runny smelly brown journalism, because it's all crap!

17 Freakin' socks...

18 Kratos, Woodward and Bernstein wrecked the profession as far as making it a haven for "change the world/make a difference" nimrods. And Gnubreed makes a good point in that the earlier Bammy Congress wasn't able to enact a "shield law" or insulate the MFM from market pressures, which were two bullets dodged.

19 Tami:  That video is pretty good.  She answers the critics in a dignified way,  but doesn't sound shrill or defensive.  

You know it is going to make the Obamabots even more angry,  though.  Matthews was having fun acting like she was hiding.  He will probably be in full spit mode today.

20 The media seems to have latched on to Loughner Logic 101.  If marginal characters can somehow be connected to the Tea Party, then that means the Tea Party is made up of marginal characters and therefore the Tea Party can be marginalized.

21 Tweety seemed like a decent guy in the early 90s. That was a long time ago.

22 Not yellow, red. They have controlled the flow of news via newspapers and non cable news networks for decades. I distinctly remember some NY Times head honcho saying that "News isn't news until they said it was". They are, as they have been, relentlessly trying to quash opposing views from the center/center right outlets for years and the AZ attack is just one vehicle out of many they will try and use to that end. The color is communist red, not so much as a tinge of yellow. On another note, it seems that they are pulling out all of the stops to prevent that whacked out preacher and his followers from protesting at the funerals of those killed, even calling them something with the word terrorist at the end of it. I wouldn't shed a tear if this preacher and his followers bus crashed and burned them all alive on the way to these protests but I don't remember these crack news reporters giving a shit about the same preacher doing his bit at fallen soldiers funerals.I guess it is news "now" and wasn't before.

23 Is Sarah the only prominent Republican to issue such a statement -- you know, a statement that shows leadership, sympathy, and a rebuke of the Left's shameless politicization of this tragedy?

24 #23  Drider,  they are concerned because if the general public starts seeing those Phelps people (especially at a nationally covered memorial service) they will start asking who they are...and Phelps was a fundraiser for Al Gore.

THAT is why they don't want them near the funerals.

25 http://vimeo.com/18698532 Now that is a speech. Gov Palin responds

26 Michael Savage coined the term "Government-Media Complex" over a dozen years ago. How prescient. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dIbP4yknleU

27
I'll take yellow journalism over red journalism any day.

28
By the way, just what does a journalist do that requires four years in J-school? How long does it take to learn who, what, when, where?

29 You know why the reports mention that she can hold up two fingers? BECAUSE SHE CAN'T HOLD UP THE OTHER THREE.

The idea that it's because she was giving a "peace sign" is absurd. Mat Lauer is a douche with a bad haircut.

Posted by: RJ at January 12, 2011 07:39 AM (qDPnZ)

Exactly. 

The left are emotional freak shows.

They cant win on the 'tea party shot the congresswoman'.. they cant win on the gun control issue..    So lets move on to the emotional freak show angle.

Lets cry on camera and insinuate to the other emotional unbalanced left.. Ms Giffords is communicating "peace' to the world.

30 Are you serious? They're saying she's holding up the 'peace' sign?

31 Is she also holding her thumb and her index finger in a circle "O" to show her support for Obama?

32

She's also release a video version too.

http://tinyurl.com/4s6337d

Posted by: Tami's Chocolate Lab at January 12, 2011 07:45 AM (VuLos)

Good or her.  Strong and compassionate.

33 What did I say? The Left has been treating Giffords' body just like the Palestinians treated Rachel Corrie's dying body -- as a prop.

34

I have a friend who used to write for a newspaper in NJ. She was always going on about "this Conservative newspaper" because her boss was a Republican. Meanwhile, every other reporter/writer there, including the Obitch, was a liberal.  I stopped reading her columns after I found out she only interviewed her liberal friends for her big "Who's Sexier? Republicans or Democrats?" piece o' crap. She got paid for that!!? I thought about sending a photo to the editor of just me vomiting on their newspaper.

35 To me yellow journalism refers to the current fear of covering certain stories. Why do I have to seek out other sources of news to hear any criticism of muslims or any democrat protected group or even to learn of any non whitehouse talking points in regards to our current president? All of the primary sources of today's news are infested with this type of yellow journalism.

36 Fox showing the Palin response. Of course they go straight to the end w/o the intro.

37 When Ted Kennedy died, remember how they used his dead body? They said, "Ted's dying wish (also his life-long wish) was to pass health care reform."

38 That video is pretty good.  She answers the critics in a dignified way,  but doesn't sound shrill or defensive.  

You know it is going to make the Obamabots even more angry,  though.  Matthews was having fun acting like she was hiding.  He will probably be in full spit mode today.

Posted by: Miss Marple at January 12, 2011 07:50 AM (Fo83G)

Yeah, I thought it was pitch perfect.

39

#24 Soothsayer

I also liked  that, since she is NOT in a position of authority in this matter, she WAITED to get as much information as possible and to REFLECT before making a statement.  This atrocity is NOT ABOUTY SARAH PALIN.

Please forgive my shouting, but I am so sick of people demonizing or belittling her.

40 The Left loves to use the body of Matthew Shepard, too. So does his mother, too. She goes around giving anti-Republican speeches about 'hate.'

41 31
Are you serious? They're saying she's holding up the 'peace' sign?

Posted by: Soothsayer at January 12, 2011 08:05 AM (KxmIT)

Matt Lauer.  "Was it the peace sign?  We dont know"

Where on Fox.. they are showing the Dr saying "we dont know if she will be in a vegetative state"

42 goddessoftheclassroom, good to see your posts.

43 Media-Democrat Party complex, to be more precise.

44 James Byrd Jr. Remember him? The Left used his 'dragged to death' body to a) smear Bush, and b) push their stupid legislation.

45 instead of reporting current events accurately and with an eye towards impartiality. 

Posted by: Kratos (Ghost of Sparta) at January 12, 2011 07:42 AM (9hSKh)

What's this impartiality you speak of?  My teacher's never discussed that.

46

Michael Chrichton mentions the Political-Media complex in his book, 'State of Fear', though he called it the 'Political-Legal-Media' complex.

I would add 'Academic' to that list.

Political-Legal-Media-Academic complex...they all support each other's positions.

47 Kirsten Scrunt calling for more regulations and background checks for guns.

This woman is serious weapons grade stupid.

48 Kirsten Scrunt calling for more regulations and background checks for guns.

This woman is serious weapons grade stupid.

Posted by: Vic at January 12, 2011 08:19 AM (M9Ie6)

All the needed checks are already in place.  But if local law enforcement does do it's job, all the checks in the world aren't going to do crap to stop something like this again. 

49 The media today wants stories that can be made into movies hence the shitty reporting.  It's not good enough for a disaster to be just that, but it needs more.  It's needs bogeymen, it needs secret plans, it needs corruption, etc.  They want ratings through the roof and plain reporting often does not provide the impetus to get eyeballs on their channel or newspapers.  They feel the need to spice it up.  Hell, look at your local news.  They tease the weather for 20 goddamn minutes with hints of something bad for your commute or day off and then when you get the weather, it's nothing.  They just wanted to hook you to watch.  Look at Katrina.  All those reports of rape rooms and roving bands of marauders turned out to be false.  But it sure hooked in the viewers and sparked outrage which spurred on more discussions and anger over something that didn't happen.  But they got their ratings.

50

...or maybe:

Political-Legal-Media-Academic-Bureaucratic Complex...do you know any bureaucrats that are conservative?

...it'd be good if we could get the acronym to be B.A.S.T.A.R.D.S.

51 19 Kratos, Woodward and Bernstein wrecked the profession as far as making it a haven for "change the world/make a difference" nimrods.

And they gave incentive to such nimrods by "bringing down Nixon". 

But the rot started to occur before Woodward and Bernstein.  I'm thinking primarily of Walter Cronkite, whose inaccurate and shoddy reporting of the Tet Offensive broke LBJ's will to carry out to war to its conclusion, and gave the North Vietnam much needed hope that they would win if they "ran out the clock". 

52 Great Post Purple Avenger! This issue is one to which I have long tried to bring attention. It is my belief that Media Bias and Media Preference for one particular perspective is responsible for Getting Kennedy, Carter, Clinton and Obama elected, with all the subsequent misery and damage to our nation which resulted from this.

In my opinion, Media bias is one of the most serious problems affecting this nation, and we should do everything we can think of to marginalize those people in the news and entertainment industries that are working to steer public opinion towards the dark side.

53 Political-Legal-Media-Academic complex...they all support each other's positions.

The LAMP complex?  Doesn't sound real sexy, but I'll roll with it.

54 So does anyone expect the media to change it's ways?

55 Kirsten Scrunt calling for more regulations and background checks for guns.


Yes.  Drug-addicted Paranoid schizophrenic nihilists intent on stalking and murdering their targets, and who have been reported to legal authorities without any action being taken by said authorities,  often thoroughly check out the regulations on handguns before purchasing and firing their weapons, to make sure they are in compliance.

The people in place to make sure this guy did not harm others didn't do their job, repeatedly.  How do more regulations fix incompetence?

56 The LAMP complex?  Doesn't sound real sexy, but I'll roll with it.

Posted by: Kratos (Ghost of Sparta) at January 12, 2011 08:26 AM (9hSKh)

 

Yeah...PALM maybe?

57 In the case of the GE/NBC/Democrat Party, the "complex" is more sinister.  GE produces allegedly "green" technologies.  NBC and it's affiliate cable network promote the Dem's agenda.  The Dem's vote massive subsidies and buyer incentives for GE's "green" technologies. 

58 @ 29 J-school is usually 2 yrs. Undergrad = 2 yrs lib arts core + 2 yrs J-sch.

59 But the rot started to occur before Woodward and Bernstein.  I'm thinking primarily of Walter Cronkite.....

Actually I think it goes much further back to the FDR years.  When someone had the audacity to speak against him he created the FCC to shut them down. That is when they ALL got on board.

Even the sainted Edward R. Murrow was a partisan hack. But because there was no opposition press nobody knew it.

60 I don't know that any of the red media is new. I remember my dad pointing it out to my much older siblings in the mid '60s. I think we just notice it more now because of alternative media. I bet if the left had realized that the internets would reveal their bias they would have figured out a way to block it very early on.

61 And the FCC is up to its old tricks trying to control the internet.

62 60 @ 29
J-school is usually 2 yrs. Undergrad = 2 yrs lib arts core + 2 yrs J-sch.

In this day and age, every major is forced to include at least a year of liberal arts.  This includes science and engineering majors.  Of course, liberal arts majors don't take more than one or two science courses and when they do, it's of the "Rocks for Jocks" or "Global Warming is E-e-e-e-vil" variety.  There is little or no coverage of the scientific method. 

63 Vic,  you are completely right.

I thought myself well-informed on news and politics all through my young adulthood.  I was absolutely shocked when 10 years after the Tet Offensive,  I found out we WON it!   I honestly thought we had lost,  all due to Walter Cronkite.

I use that now when trying to explain media bias.  You will not believe how many people in their late 50's and early 60's STILL think we lost that Tet offensive.  They are shocked when I tell them it was the opposite,  and I encourage them to get on the internet and find out what is really happening today!

64 55 So does anyone expect the media to change it's ways?

Posted by: CDR M at January 12, 2011 08:27 AM (JSetw)

I do, but not because they want to. I expect them to change their ways because they are going to be driven off the field of battle otherwise. If they are to survive as an industry, they will have to change their ways.

It is our duty to make this happen as soon as possible.

65 I still wish someone with a different bent had bought Newsweek for $1.00.

It would have been worth it just to lay off most of the writers and see them whining to their friends.

66 Purple Avenger, I'm not sure that the adage "the more things change the more they stay the same" isn't yet applicable.

Given, there are the literate and thoughtful Americans who utilize the internet wisely. Like you, the Mises Institute has high hopes for the public to educate themselves.

However, during recent political campaigns, the general consensus here and other right-of-center blogs was that in general, people are stupid.

For that generally stupid public, today's MFM similarly services the same "fall into authoritarian line or succumb to the chaos" propaganda that Hearst promoted. Every man has his price. In his day, Hearst et al. "owned" law enforcement having bought men in office from every political party to cover all angles. For practical purposes, they owned Congress and perhaps White House administrations, purchased with robber-baron comrades in elitist pseudo-aristocratic authoritarian arms.

Consider the violent politics of the day, the horrible tenements for slave/labor employees of the day's industrial robber-barons wannabes. These slums were populated by the working class whose wage earners were working over 12-hour days, every member of the family working, including the children -- no workers' rights respected by most employers such as Hearst. Hence the legitimate uprising for the laboring for decency, struggling under circumstances that did not recognize the ideal of "equality under the law" by those who would subsequently elect Woodrow Wilson. Even Theodore Roosevelt would change championship horse midstream/midlife when political winds shifted the balance of power from "the people" back to self-appointed (self-made) "aristocrats".

For all the contrasts supporting distinctions, "that was then, this is now," technology certainly hasn't changed the brutish human beast's lust for blood and power. Awareness is a painful purchase. Ask Adam and Eve, evicted from Paradise for disobediently choosing to know through experience the difference between good and evil.

The responsibility, nonetheless, is the individual's.

Today's individual has no excuse for ignorance. Information is available at the touch of the fingertips.

But so many prefer the comfortable "bliss" of authoritarianism, having perverted expectations. And the only predictable response to the shock of realization is pain. So? Denial. Rx mood altering deadening of the senses and erasure of disturbing thoughts and memories.

Or not. Deal with logic without reverting to revisionism.

67 I still wish someone with a different bent had bought Newsweek for $1.00.

It would have been worth it just to lay off most of the writers and see them whining to their friends.

Posted by: Miss Marple at January 12, 2011 08:39 AM (Fo83G)

Wonder why Breitbart didn't jump on that?  Although, they would have probably just kept turning down his offer.

68 Bravo.  Spot-on. 

69 And conservative media - Fox, Limbaugh, Hannity - isn't at all mixed together, & doesn't at all coordinate its message engineered by its masters hidden behind big corporate walls. What utter hypocrisy and stupidity. This meme from the right is tiresome, quite tiresome after 20-plus years. When Fox and Limbaugh get lower ratings than CNN and MSNBC, when there's no WSJ and Washington Times and National Review feel free to bitch and whine about the "liberal, conspiratorial press" then. The boy who cried wolf wasn't this bad. Oh, I almost forgot - let the name-calling begin. I'll start things off - troll, moron, jackass, jag-off. And BTW, I'm really getting tired of these. You could at least come up with something original.

70 I use that now when trying to explain media bias.  You will not believe how many people in their late 50's and early 60's STILL think we lost that Tet offensive.

It is much worse than that. The common perception of people today is that we lost the entire war. When we got out of the war the Viet Cong were essentially destroyed and the North was pushed back on all fronts to the North. The South was holding its own against them.

Then came the Dems in congress who cut off all aid to the South while the North was still being supplied by the Russians and the Chinese. With a loss of support the South was pushed back.

The "war" was not lost. The Dems gave it to the communists who are their natural allies.

71 Go back to the children's table, JEA; nobody takes you seriously.

72 Fox, conservative media; hahahahaha

More weapons grade stupid.

73 replaced by propaganda provided pretty much verbatim from the political Democrat partyies.

Fixt

74 And BTW, I'm really getting tired of these. You could at least come up with something original.

Posted by: JEA at January 12, 2011 08:43 AM (R5LB3)

We'll come up with something original when you do.

75
And BTW, I'm really getting tired of these. You could at least come up with something original.

Posted by: JEA at January 12, 2011 08:43 AM (R5LB3)

Why bother when the classics are spot on? Now, feel free to go fuck yourself.

76 And BTW, I'm really getting tired of these.


Here's your hat.  What's your hurry?

77

Great article, PA!

Thoughtful, cogent, concise.

Well done. Well said.

78

Today's individual has no excuse for ignorance. Information is available at the touch of the fingertips.

Alas, with Soros having bought Google for Obama and about a million fake "institutes" anyone who hasn't paid really close attention is even duped by an internet search. You have to have some intelligence and some life experience to figure it out. For example, do a search on marijuana. Most of the first page will eventually lead you back to the "Drug Policy Alliance". Then search who they are? Try not to notice that the top of the page says "we believe the war on drugs is the new "jim crow"". Turns out to be a Soros front group with board members from every far far lefty org in the world. Then try to figure out why Soros and Code Pink are pro illegal drug. I guess because that attracts and unifies their base.

79

Ok JEA, I'll bite. Tell me what corporation is managing the message of the right?

Hint: It's not "big oil" they work for Obama--see BP donations, it's not GE, it's not the auto industry, it's not Wall Street, it's not the govt contractors--they donate heavily to dems, who is it? Please provide a link.

80 It's interesting to see the evolution of the cartoon characterization sourcing the phrase "Yellow Journalism", from The Brownies to The Yellow Kid's own radicalization from Pulizer's orientation into Hearse's manipulation.

Note that the predecessor of the Yellow Kid cartoonist utilized Celtic mythology that humorously lent a ray of wisdom for the day's problems experienced by inner city Irish Americans.

Reward oft times is slow to fall
For those who earned it best of all.
A Palmer Cox Brownie from Brownies Around the World (1894).

But rats have scent as well as sight,
and Brownies saw they showed no fright.
And it was soon as plain as day,
that playing Cat would never pay.
Palmer Cox, "The Brownies" : 1907.

On to The Yellow Kid, hero of Hogan's Alley:

The Yellow Kid was a bald, snaggle-toothed boy who wore a yellow nightshirt and hung around in a ghetto alley filled with equally odd characters, mostly other children. With a goofy grin, the Kid habitually spoke in a ragged, peculiar ghetto argot printed on his shirt, a device meant to lampoon advertising billboards. The strip has been described as "... a turn-of-the-century theater of the city, in which class and racial tensions of the new urban, consumerist environment were acted out by a mischievous group of New York City kids from the wrong side of the tracks." The Yellow Kid's head was drawn wholly shaved as if having been recently ridden of lice, a common sight among children in New York's tenement ghettos at the time. His nightshirt, a hand-me-down from an older sister, was white or pale blue in the first color strips. [Later] to William Randolph Hearst's New York Journal American where he drew the Yellow Kid in a new full-page color strip which was significantly violent and even vulgar compared to his first panels for Truth magazine. Pulitzer, who had retained the copyright to Hogan's Alley, hired George Luks to continue drawing the original (and now less popular) version of the strip for the World and hence the Yellow Kid appeared simultaneously in two competing papers for about a year.

"Richard Felton Outcault (1863-192 created the comic strip Hogan's Alley, which is considered to be the first significant comic strip in American newspapers. It debuted in 1895 and featured Mickey Dugan, who is better known as the Yellow Kid."

81 Per the original post, the concept is often referred to as the military-entertainment complex by theorists concerned about the framing of perception through the strategic use of media.

82 I would recommend people look at Twitter.  The press outrage now is that she used the term blood libel.  David Corn is charging her with comparing herself to Holocaust victims.

Anyone who doesn't get what we are up against is living in a fool's paradise.

83

Ah, not quite, there PA...

Yes, we all know how "yellow" journalism was named, but frankly, most of Hearst's "quotes", well - aren't, and second Ike's speech was a warning @ the dangers of overwhelming government influence on sectors of society - thus he named other "complexes" to avoid, but they're conveniently forgotten in favor of the "MI complex" line.

As far as media "bias" goes, some here have correctly pointed out that "bias" has been w/us forever - the claiming of "unbiased" is a creation of mass marketing, taking over during the post WWI era.

By the post WWII era of broadcasting, "bias" had morphed into a weapon to wield against disagreeing viewpoints - a technique fully formed by the '60s.

It (the myth of unbiased media) is nearly broken today.  May it never rest in peace...

84 I remember my dad telling me that the whole world owed Rush everything.  He was the first main engine that brought truth to the debate.  He allowed people to 'dine' on meat (truth) after a life time of being 'starved' by the American media.

85 Alas, with Soros having bought Google for Obama and about a million fake "institutes" anyone who hasn't paid really close attention is even duped by an internet search.

dagny,

Yes, we agree on the given. Revisionism holds strongest sway everywhere now. Countering fraud with "the record" requires unadulterated written accounts. Hence, the paper trail required for scholarly evidence given that the most powerful forces today manipulate via revisions what is available online and how things appear. (This also emphasizes how important the paper ballots are to counter massive election fraud.)

"Awareness" is not easily attained. Obviously, research the source in order to consider the source. And finally, the amount one is willing to research all perspectives prior to forming one's own premise is a strong deciding factor in what one is capable of understanding.

86 Wow, that's delusional even for Corn-in-my-shit.  Maybe JEA can provide us some insight into how great minds like that work and how that differs from Loughner's inability to logically reach sane conclusions.

87

 JEA? Hello? Where are you? You know which corporations are controlling the right and you should tell us! C'mon give us a link! I'm waaaaaaiting.

 

maverick muse

It's hard on the uninitiated. Take a conservative college student who doesn't have the life experience or the background to even recognize who some of the people/front groups manipulating the narrative. I've spent more time trying to educate my kids on this one point than teaching them any other thing.

88

The media is no longer connected with any form of journalism.  It is progressive, marxist propaganda as directed by the Democrat Party (they need to change the name of their party to something more honest, say the Stalinist/Maoist Party but honesty is a virtue in short supply with these tools).

89 Jonah Goldberg complaining about the use of "blood libel" because of it's historic antisemitic use.

90 92 Jonah Goldberg complaining about the use of "blood libel" because of it's historic antisemitic use.

Posted by: dagny at January 12, 2011 09:25 AM (+Z6ve)

Well George Soros was a Nazi enabler

91

Well George Soros was a Nazi enabler

Still is

92 Posted by: dagny at January 12, 2011 09:31 AM (+Z6ve)

Well there is that. And I should go further, he was more than an enabler, he was a collaborator.

93 hello everyone,im wholesale supplier  online

Welcome to our website   

=====   http://www.1shopping.us/    =======

accept paypal and free shipping

We need your support and trust!!!

Dear friends, please temporarily stop your footsteps

To our website Walk around A look at

Maybe you'll find happiness in your sight shopping heaven and earth

You'll find our price is more suitable for you.

=====   http://www.1shopping.us/   ========

94 PA: "An army of Davids is watching them 7x24, and they don't like it one bit."

One of the best catch phrases (thanks, Glenn Reynolds!) and most profound developments in the history of societies, respectively.

This Army is going to have to keep battling because the centralizing powers that be will remain relentless in corralling media if not selectively banishing it outright. It's now an existential absolute. Once one enjoys freedom, those liberated generally don't want to give it up. This ability to circumvent power centers is a lifeline. It will be assaulted.

Oh, and sorry about the violent war terminology. So any crazy people reading this, don't go shooting up the place. A better solution would be to compost your New York Times, Washington Post, AP redistributors, union cards, and pre-filled 2012 Democrat election ballots. Do it for the children.

95 s☺mej☼e: "The yellow journalism of old has rusted into a crazier progressive red journalism."

Nice turn of a phrase. In the old days, it was "What's black and white and re(a)d all over?" Answer: a newspaper. Then, it was "What's black and white and Red all over?" Answer: The New York Times.

"Red Journalism" will do just fine as an abbreviation.

96 PA, you need to revise your article--take out the "even-handed, everybody does it" bullshit until you can cite one single major media outlet that has wholesale repeated, with no "explanations," the GOP talking points (and Sean Hannity doesn't count).

There is not propaganda from both parties repeated in the media, there is propaganda from ONE party repeated in the media.

97 I can't believe no-one else has said it....ok I'll do it:

FIRST!

98 #81 since I don't facebook, thanks for the Palin post.

Given the Left's malicious smear campaign to scapegoat her yet again, it would have appeared defensive for her to respond any differently that she did very well.

However, Obama wouldn't agree with her. The Left, whether they know better or not, will never admit their own faults, their own responsibilities. Today's Left has "perfected" the distractive art of denial by deft transposition of fault to blame the opponent.

Also, this particular criminal who attempted to mass murder (attacking those not "purely" Leftist to meet with his crazed standard of approval)  is not an "apolitical" youth. Not fitting into the public's range of acceptability does not of itself make this misfit "apolitical".  It is by matter of convenience that he's tagged by tolerant moderates to be of the "Insane Party" and for his politics to be ignored and dismissed therewith.

The '08 victors template for action/reaction dictates unequivocably that Leftists are sensitive, tolerant and peaceful minded folk who have every "right" to persecute their political opponents, to wrongfully perceive conservatives as bigots. That the '08 victors lost the American '10 vote of Tea Party confidence only antagonizes the Left's wounded beast "sensibilities" to justify malicious Alinsky abusive lusts to usurp authoritarian powers.

There is a point when playing nice is playing dumb. Bipartisans expect conservatives to stay stuck on silent stupidity, but that bubble has burst. No sense in playing the idiot.

Every reason now to hold to the authentic, empirically documented record to which all are accountable equally under the Supreme Law of the Land.

99

Overall nice statement by Mrs. Palin. She waited, reflected, and produced something thoughtful with an appropriate tone, IMO. My hopes and prayers continue to go out to the victims of this heinous act.

A couple of thoughts:

I'm sure the MSM has teams sharpshooting Palin's statement and gathering talking points to disparage it, but it's a helluva lot better than anything that's come from the left.

Anyone else thinking about how grotesque this is, that we've been drawn into this battle, before the blood was even dry? I don't think there is any choice, if someone attacks you, you have to fight back, you cannot always choose your time to fight back. But really, just Godawful, a new low for the left.

Cannot believe Obama is actually fanning the flames by calling the sheriff and congratulating him on his "rhetoric" instead of encouraging him to simply do his job and leave the grandstanding to others.

Long hours will be spent crafting the narrative for the memorial and the State of the Union address. Although he's smart enough not to be too overt, Obama simply will not be able to resist taking some shots.

Sorry for the underlines  

100 The phrase I've come up with is "yellow dog journalism". (Wrote about it at length here.) That combines the type of journalism with the partisanship angle. Practitioners are YDJs, or "yidges".

Especially egregious practitioners are "yidgits", combining bias, unprofessionalism, and idiocy. Always seemed like a good set of labels to me.

101 It's "red" journalism. Pravda 2.0.

102 I've spent more time trying to educate my kids on this one point than teaching them any other thing. Posted by: dagny

No doubt. Been there, and still doing that with the kid in college.

Who all caught Savage last night reflecting on the Yale self-professed "Superior Chinese Mother". He notes that America today is shamed by the Dr. Spock corruption of America's former competitive glory, as American students in his youth led international testing scores; whereas, today American students (products of the Ayers/Obama/Annenberg Educational System incorporating authoritarianism and socialist dogma and forfeiting math, empirical records and science)  rank pathetically below Shanghai students in reading, math and science. Ironic but predictable via technique/outcome, China being the hardest core authoritarian state produces effective studies via the demand to achieve, while America being the softest core "no loser" American subjugation via the mandate for PC tolerance to authoritarian elitists produced all losers in testing achievement scores internationally.

Asians never had the monopoly on superior parenting skills prior to and immediately following WWII.

Some boomers were raised by parents determined to just get on with life and play along with progressives, to be progressive in order to fit in with peers and professors while advancing their careers on the GI Bill educational benefits. On the other hand, of those boomers raised by parents determined to hold the lines of tradition, despite the "corrupting" progressive tide, most rebelled even as some kept their noses clean while observing the cultural revolution. Political assassinations deprived America of JFK, MLK jr., RKF, and Malcolm  X. Black Power supremacists rioted and burned downtown  black ghettos across the nation even while the Bill Ayers typed domestic terrorists from the far Left "white guilt" manipulative Ivy League elites made influential way into politics, the media, entertainment industry and Hollywood that today have effectively amalgamated.

103 I thought myself well-informed on news and politics all through my young adulthood.  I was absolutely shocked when 10 years after the Tet Offensive,  I found out we WON it!   I honestly thought we had lost,  all due to Walter Cronkite.

Not only did we win it, the Viet Cong were essentially wiped out; they never again in the war were able to field any sort of effective fighting force. All of the communist fighters after Tet were North Vietnamese Army regulars. The news media never said anything about that because it didn't fit their narrative about the war; that it was a civil war  of agrarian reformers or something.

Vietnam was the only war in history where the losing side never lost a battle but managed to lose the war. The Nixon bombing campaign of North Vietnam had brought the North Vietnamese to the peace talks where they were ready to sue for peace when... Well here is an editorial I wrote on what happened:

To most people the question "Is John Kerry a traitor?" is a ridiculous question. To these people the question is as ludicrous and over the top as the "Bush is Hitler" rhetoric one hears from the juvenile extremes of the far left.

Yet for some thoughtful people the question "Is John Kerry a traitor?" is a reasonable one.

Clearly both views can't be correct. Either the question is a reasonable one or it is not.

Usually when there are conflicting views on a subject the most likely reason for the conflict is a lack of knowledge on one side or the other.

In the interest of full disclosure, I am going to state that I am someone for whom the question is not absurd.

I am going to present the case for my side. When I speculate I will try to label it as such. I'll try to refrain from speculation except when I believe it is necessary to illustrate a nuance to the reader which might otherwise not be apparent.

I will begin by defining terms so that everyone can fully understand what is being discussed.

Here is a Webster's dictionary defintion of the word 'traitor':

1. One who violates his allegiance and betrays his country; one guilty of treason; one who, in breach of trust, delivers his country to an enemy, or yields up any fort or place entrusted to his defense, or surrenders an army or body of troops to the enemy, unless when vanquished; also, one who takes arms and levies war against his country; or one who aids an enemy in conquering his country.

In the United States treason is defined in the U.S. Constitution in Article 3 Section 3 which reads:

"Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court."

Please note that this section is broken into two parts, the first part defines what an act of treason is, the second part says what is necessary to convict someone of treason in a court of law. Thus a traitor is someone who meets the terms of the first part of the section, a convicted traitor is someone who has been convicted by a court of the act of treason. It is possible for someone to be a traitor, and yet be impossible to prove this fact in a court of law; in the same way it is possible for someone to be a murderer and escape conviction.

John Kerry served in the War in Vietnam as a Naval Officer. He was involved in combat with the enemy and was awarded several medals for his combat actions. While some have questions about the circumstances surrounding his awards, no one, to the best of my knowledge, has alleged any actions in Vietnam which would qualify as an act of treason.

After he returned to the United States Kerry was placed on active reserve status, after a period of time he was transferred to the inactive reserve, and promoted to the rank of Lt. While on inactive reserve status Lt Kerry appeared on a television show speaking out against the War in Vietnam in April of 1970. In May of 1970 LT Kerry met with both the Viet Cong and North Vietnamese delegates to the peace talks in Paris France. In 1971 Kerry testified before the Fulbright Commission of the U.S. Senate which was investigating alleged war crimes committed by U.S. military personnel in the War in Vietnam. After this time Kerry participated in various War protests as a leader of the Vietnam Veterans Against the War organization.

To the best of my knowledge nobody disputes any of the above.

As a member of the Naval Reserve Lt John Kerry in 1970 was subject to the Uniform Code of Military Justice. In section 904 article 104 the U.C.M.J. states:

Any person who--

(1) aids, or attempts to aid, the enemy with arms, ammunition, supplies, money, or other things; or

(2) without proper authority, knowingly harbors or protects or gives intelligence to or communicates or corresponds with or holds any intercourse with the enemy, either directly or indirectly; shall suffer death or such other punishment as a court-martial or military commission may direct.

Under part 2 above Kerry's communication with enemy representatives in Paris is a clear violation. Please note that communicating with the enemy is not a minor technical offense. It is a capital crime; one which carries a potential death sentence.

All by itself the commission of a capital crime by Kerry should be enough to alert anyone that claims of Kerry's treasonous behavior merit serious attention.

Kerry has claimed that he met with these delegations to discuss POW issues with them.

A single appearance on TV as a war protester doesn't give anyone very high level credentials in the political world.

Speaking with the enemy delegates in Paris was a very difficult task: they argued with the U.S. delegation for weeks on end about the shape of the negotiating table. Henry Kissinger had trouble getting to talk to them. I have read that Kerry used a friend of his to get in to see both of those delegations.

Let us speculate for a second what his friend could have said to them: "I have this friend who was a US Naval officer in the war who wants to talk to you about your treatment of the POW's" or something similar.

It is easy to see why Kerry might want to meet with them, the question is: Why would they want to meet with him? Why would it be to their advantage to talk to him?

If Kerry really was there to talk about POW's why would he talk to the Viet Cong? The Viet Cong, as a practical matter, didn't have POW's, they had no fixed camps to hold them, so the POW issue was moot to them. The US military personnel the VC captured were mostly turned over to North Vietnam to hold.

In meeting with the enemy representatives Kerry committed a capital crime. The evidence of that is iron clad; he admitted it under oath before the Fulbright Commission. No one who is not insane would commit a capital crime just to talk to the enemy about how they are treating our POW's.

Kerry's claim to have been talking about POW's simply doesn't hold water. It seems to be a cover story.

The only reasonable thing his friend could have said which might have sparked an interest in Kerry among the enemy delegates is: "I have a friend who was a US Naval officer in Vietnam who has spoken out against the war."

That perhaps gets him in to see Madame Binh - the head of the Viet Cong delegation. But what does he say to her that gets him to see the North Vietnamese?

As far as I can see there is only one thing he could say: "I can help you win the war." Otherwise they have no reason to talk to him. The initial contact could only have occurred if the other side saw it to be to their advantage to talk to him.

Perhaps Kerry had no problem committing the capital crime of communicating with the enemy because he knew that what he was doing was far worse - he was adhering to the enemy, giving them aid and comfort; which is the legal definition of treason in the US constitution.

The analysis of Kerry's action at the Paris peace talks is speculation, even though it appears to be logically consistent. However there were events which occurred later which give very strong credence to that analysis.

In 1983 the Communist Government of Vietnam awarded John Kerry as a "Hero of Communist Victory".

The Communists know what went on at the Paris peace talks in 1970, We don't. On the subject of Kerry's possible treason they are the ones who are in a position to know, not anyone else. Their award of Kerry is powerful evidence that the speculation about Kerry's conversations at the Paris peace talks in 1970 is accurate.

No other American in the peace movement was given such an award. Kerry was probably given the award because the Communists considered him to be the key to American defeat in Vietnam.

Shortly before the presidential election of 2004 a captured Viet Cong document dating from 1971 was uncovered at the Texas Tech library. The document confirms that the war protests in the U.S. were being coordinated by the delegates at the Paris peace talks.

In my opinion the question "Is John Kerry a traitor?" is not "over the top"; it is a reasonable question which merits serious further study.

104 Over-exposure to violence takes the obvious degrading toll. Regardless of the source of exposure, be it real or "virtual", perpetuated violence affects the psyche, and eventually plays out. That's understood. I've already mentioned parenting, educational, professional, societal and sourced information in this "yellow journalism" thread. Now to our national defense and state of the union, to observe how the over-exposure to combat/violence takes its toll on our very finest, noting the rise in suicide.

This month's Air Force Magazine, Letters  p.6 begins with "Suicide in the Ranks" by Col. James Campbell Quick, USAFR (Ret.), University of Texas @ Arlington. [Quote:]

My concern focuses on your framing of the suicide problem. This is hugely consequential.  ...suicide in the ranks was framed as a public health problem, not a clinical problem. Problem definition has significant consequences for problem solution.  If it is a clinical problem, then treatment interventions for victims and survivors becomes a  key. We can even engage fitness training for individuals, building resilience within individuals and the force, but these interventions, while good, fall short if suicide is not a clinical problem. I agree with the DOD task force in defining the suicide problem as a public health problem.   To define suicide as a public health problem of a chronic nature in our current  military context means that we must look at life history of the problem and start with the preferred point of intervention to get at the root cause. Primary prevention is the preferred point of intervention. Primary prevention means to do something about the cause of the problem, the health risk factor, or the demands and stressors to which men and women are exposed. The profession of arms is an inherently dangerous and risky profession with an unlimited liability clause. However, ...always minimize American risks while escalating enemy risk. Primary prevention in this context means to manage the risk and stress exposures. To do this requires a serious national look at force structure. We've been in the longest war in our national history and I'm not convinced that we've correctly sized the force for the fights. That is where we must look first at the scourge of suicide in the ranks.   You can ask good young men and women to walk in harm's way only so many times before bad things happen. Suicide is the worst case. There are no quick fixes for this tragic rising tide. [End quote.]

As a footnote regarding what drives a person over the brink, I note the obvious on behalf of our military that the PC Rules of Engagement emphasize rather than minimize American risks while minimizing rather than escalating enemy risk.

Stateside, the convoluted PC mandates exonerating the political Left of responsibility while simultaneously casting improper aspersions of bigoted guilt on the political Right is the matter at hand. PC is the worst case.

E pluribus unum does not mean that by assimilation to authoritarianism there can only be The One (dictator/totalitarian globalism).

105 btw, Gates is preparing to slash military health care.

106 An Observation

There are a few historically accurate onset of American involvement in the Vietnam conflict movies available.

107 on Palin

linky

108 OK, I'm going to throw out something controversial here.

The purpose of the traditional media is to SELL AD SPACE.

Programming and/or stories only exist to fill the space between the ads.

The ads matter; the stories don't.

Keeping that in mind, and knowing that liberals populate the media, why wouldn't they push their agenda when a good chunk of the public appears to agree with them?

Solution: Boycott advertisers. That will stem the tide somewhat.

109
Operation Pipewrench!

*sigh*

110 shibumi: "Solution: Boycott advertisers. That will stem the tide somewhat."

I don't watch the MFM so I really don't know who to boycott... except General Electric and its subsidiaries (which is actually difficult to do).

I mean I agree with the sentiment but tracking them is actually a problem.


IllTemperedCur: "Operation Pipewrench! *sigh*"

Some day. Keep the faith.

111

shibumi - of course the purpose of a media corporation is to earn profits by selling subscriptions and advertising.  But the purpose of the vast majority of journalists is to uphold and advance their own cultural and political values, which they perceive as vastly superior to everyone else's.  These values are uniformly liberal and libertine.  If they feel these values are threatened, they will also use their positions to denigrate and smear ideas and values - and the people who hold them - that are antithetical to theirs. 

The election of Barack Obama was a watershed moment for a whole lot of these people.  The older ones saw in Obama the second coming of a combination of Jack and Bobby Kennedy, the heroes of their childhoods; the culmination of the civil-rights movement, which was the great social movement of their youth; and the triumph of progressivism over what they view as retrograde and backwards-looking conservatism.  They read all sorts of things into Obama that were never there; they concluded all sorts of things about America as the result of his election that aren't real; the whole thing was one giant liberal fantasy.  They thought Utopia was right around the corner.  They actually believed Obama's bullshit about stopping the rising of the oceans and all that.

Now comes the Tea Party, Sarah Palin, and the 2010 elections to shatter their fantasy.  They are pissed.  They can't process that a majority of Americans do not share their fantasy about Obama, about government solving all of our social ills, or anything else.  So they have to make shit up about this movement in order to denigrate it, to deligitimize it, so they do not have to actually confront it and understand it.  A very easy way to do that is to call it violent, extremist, unstable, racist, etc.  People who hold views like that are not worthy of confrontation in a legitimate battle of ideas and philosophy.  They can be dismissed with a wave of the hand.

112 Your conclusion is nonsense. SupposeYellow Journalism is bad, and what the MFM is doing is bad. Even if it is false that MFM == YJ, that does not mean that YJ is therefore good.

To support that YJ is good, you would need to address that independent of what the MFM is doing today.

113 Suppose Yellow Journalism is bad

I never made that assertion, YOU DID.  I noted that others have generally assumed that connotation for it though. 

114 So read this and tell me that JEA is no troll   71 And conservative media - Fox, Limbaugh, Hannity - isn't at all mixed together, & doesn't at all coordinate its message engineered by its masters hidden behind big corporate walls.

What utter hypocrisy and stupidity.

This meme from the right is tiresome, quite tiresome after 20-plus years.

When Fox and Limbaugh get lower ratings than CNN and MSNBC, when there's no WSJ and Washington Times and National Review feel free to bitch and whine about the "liberal, conspiratorial press" then. The boy who cried wolf wasn't this bad.

Oh, I almost forgot - let the name-calling begin. I'll start things off - troll, moron, jackass, jag-off.

And BTW, I'm really getting tired of these. You could at least come up with something original.

Posted by: JEA at January 12, 2011 08:43 AM (R5LB3)