The Sad Saga of the Media

Ours is a diseased media – Guest post by Mustang who also spins some great tales at Fix Bayonets and Thoughts From Afar

You know, if this wasn’t pathetic, it might make you laugh aloud. Recently, the New York Times claimed to have leaked a ‘secret’ gloom and doom climate change report; one that President Trump was trying to keep away from the public. Included in the article was the ever-present sniping at anyone who hasn’t swallowed the Gore lies and distortions. Now …um … the British scientist who completed this report wonders, how could the New York Times leak a report that was available to the public since the study went through the review process?

Is this an example of shoddy journalism, a careless attempt at fake news, or is it the very best example of leftist humor?

I would love to be able to peek under the covers, wouldn’t you? Wouldn’t you love to know who and what are behind these slapdash attempts to smear President Trump and/or his administration? Don’t you love all my conspiracy theories, noting of course that if people are out to get you, then you aren’t paranoid?

Why would the NYT (ostensibly responsible to profit-motivated stockholders) waste ink and space on such a dumb article/accusation as this? Particularly one so easily debunked. I think the answer is that it doesn’t matter. Someone is paying them to do it. I have no idea what the costs are of doing this, but I do know that a full-page advertisement in the NYT costs $150,000 (if done in black and white) —and you know, that is such a paltry sum of money to someone like Georgie Soros, or any number of other communist rats.

What I would love to see happen is someone from the Washington Examiner or New York Post do an expose on the behind-the-scenes antics of the American left. Tell us what happened, who is paying for it, and then let us be done with this mish-mash about how journalists on the left are really looking out for America’s best interests.

It is long past the time for Americans to begin holding the news media responsible for their nonsense. Why have we allowed the NYT to get away with such things as: plagiarism, failure to print the truth about famine in the Ukraine, or the Duke University Lacrosse fiasco, or delayed publication of the NSA’s warrantless surveillance of the American people?

I think it’s a market-share game that results on the print media preying upon its readers. As a case in point, the NYT printed stories on fashion news that was actually promoting its advertisers. Admittedly, no one has ever accused the New York Times of honesty.

I believe the NYT already knows that the number of people who read their rag is but a small percentage of the overall population (estimated between 650,000 to just over one million —in a city of just under 9 million inhabitants), but those who do read it are addicted to leftism and they’ll keep coming back for more —no matter how dishonest the stories are. Similarly, CNN and MSNBC pander to a peculiar audience, which is to say people sufficiently stupid to buy into communist social policy, and as equally senseless in buying products offered by their advertisers.

Well, to summarize, these are the millions of Americans who have long warmed to the idea of forgiving women who flush their babies down toilets. The way I see it, they are beyond redemption. Finally, in speaking about journalists, my good friend Kid” put up a video the other day. In the video, a Russia’s foreign minister enters the press room and prepares to answer questions. Before he takes his seat, however, American [ita non sit vox designativa] Reporter Andrea Mitchell begins to screech out questions. Perturbed, the foreign minister asked if her behavior was an example of her up-bringing. Good for him!

The video caused me to look more closely at Mitchell. My conclusion is that she is woefully unqualified to do the job for which she is being paid. She has a degree in English Literature, and while this may confirm her literacy, she is still as dumb as a box of rocks. If you wanted to get someone to respond to questions, and if those answers were ever to end up as a headline, then wouldn’t you want to approach that person with politeness? This incident, by the way, makes me wonder if the Russian foreign minister ever again allowed Mitchell back into the press gallery.

I hope not.


Maxine Waters confirmed Obama’s database, NY Times reverses itself on wiretap

Odds and ends of things that confirm the Progs have much to explain as they flail around dealing with Trump. I’ll throw in a tweet from our gal Hillary for good measure. Scroll down a bit for the clip of Maxine Waters.

Flynn’s conversation was wiretapped in December, when Obama was in office. We learn the conversation with the Russian Ambassador was in Trump Tower. You connect the dots.  Today NY Times says, “There were no wire taps!” Earlier:

Then we have Hillary weighing in:

Maxine Waters: Dems will use Obama’s “Big Brother” Database June 10, 2013

So Maxine Waters, not the brightest bulb in the room, had a clear vision of what the Obama regime was all about and knew they were collecting information on all of us and spilled the beans back in February 2013. We knew he had his enemies list, but could we have imagined him going to the extent he has?  If this was not bad enough keep in mind, a Foreign company owns U.S. election software, with ties to Obama. Best part? The servers are located in Spain. (And we are worried abut Trump) Yes, our next election will be no more no less than a Banana Republic election. That is what we have become.

Published on Feb 11, 2013

“The President has put in place an organization with the kind of database that no one has ever seen before in life,” Representative Maxine Waters told Roland Martin on Monday. “That’s going to be very, very powerful,” Waters said. “That database will have information about everything on every individual on ways that it’s never been done before and whoever runs for President on the Democratic ticket has to deal with that. They’re going to go down with that database and the concerns of those people because they can’t get around it. And he’s [President Obama] been very smart. It’s very powerful what he’s leaving in place.”


NY Time’s David Carr: “Middle Places” Home Of “Low-Sloping Foreheads”

Tucker Carlson interviewed the NY Times Public Editor on the biased Trump stories last night. It was a good interview, and I include it here. A number of the Time’s reporters were covered including their tweets. One reporter that came to mind was Time’s reporter, David Carr. As I write this post today, as a deplorable, irredeemable, who clings to God and Guns, complete with a low forehead from Middle Earth according to David Carr, I went back to my way back post.

What liberal elites really think of the average America  

”If it’s Kansas, if it’s Missouri, no big deal. You know, that’s the dance of the low-sloping foreheads. The middle places, right? [pause] Did I just say that aloud?”

The liberal elitists who used their control of the media establishment to install Barack Hussein Obama in power. pride themselves on being too full of nuance to express coherent opinions. Yet when it comes to their attitudes toward normal Americans, they speak plainly enough. Here columnist David Carr of the odious New York Times sums up the ruling class’s attitude toward the denizens of Flyover Country.

Writer’s comment 12/2/16: We showed them, didn’t we? We got the House, Senate, President. They are not laughing now are they?

Tucker Carlson Interviews Ny Times Public Editor Liz Spayd On Biased Trump Stories 12/2/16

Spayd challenged Carlson on the partiality of Fox News while still acknowledging, “Why would you cut off half of America and make them feel like this is not their New York Times?”Tucker Carlson Interviews Ny Times Public Editor Liz Spayd On Biased Trump Stories by the media and the NY Times in particular. It was brave of Liz Spayd To come On “Tucker Carlson Tonight” where she ended up holding her own for an interesting interview with Tucker Carlson December 2, 2016.12/2/16

New York Times ‘angel’ Mexican Billionaire becomes 2nd largest investor

If we thought that the NY Times had a penchant for the Progressives, we need only to learn who the “Angel” is that is coming along to prop up the floundering Times.Now Mexico has a direct mouthpiece. All the news that is unfit to print is how I look at it. Why is it that those who have so much are determined that the rest of us poor suckers here in America are expected to carry their imposed weight of their destructive policies? Here we go

Mexican billionaire Carlos Slim, the world’s second-wealthiest person, is now reportedly the “largest investor” in the New York Times after doubling his ownership stake in the company. According to a Bloomberg report, Slim exercised “options to acquire 15.9 million shares.

As Breitbart News has documented, the Times has been one of President Barack Obama’s most ferocious defenders on amnesty issues. It has, for instance, “asserted, even though the numbers prove otherwise, that it was ‘delusional’” to think Obama’s “DACA program lured more illegal immigrants to America,” mocked “its own Republican columnist for criticizing Obama’s potential Caesarism,” and “maligned opponents of Obama’s executive action, who have emphasized that granting millions of work permits to illegal immigrants would make it more difficult for American workers, of all races and backgrounds, to get jobs, as ‘nativists.’”

Slim, a fierce advocate for amnesty legislation, has reportedly “introduced a campaign to integrate about half a million” DREAMers into the U.S. workforce. And Facebook co-founder Mark Zuckerberg, who also started the pro-amnesty lobbying group, pushed for comprehensive amnesty legislation at Slim’s charity event in Mexico last year.

More at Breitbart

NY Times changes Story, Now Says Benghazi Khattala Was Upset Over Video

I have been looking for confirmation of this story, and Gateway Pundit has picked it up so here goes. It is of course, “unnamed sources” to the Times that are spinning this. But knowing this regime, it makes sense. So Abu will be offered a deal. Give us the “video made me do it” in exchange for who knows how many Gitmo terrorists. Maybe a cushy prison, really the options are endless. So here we go:

What he did in the period just before the attack has remained unclear. But Mr. Abu Khattala told other Libyans in private conversations during the night of the attack that he was moved to attack the diplomatic mission to take revenge for an insult to Islam in an American-made online video.Fast forward to today…

The New York Times now says Khattala planned the attack because he was upset about the American-made online movie.

So, the one guy who will substantiate the White House claim that the YouTube video animated a “peaceful protest” is the only one caught, after two years, when he’s walking around mocking the charges? And it happens to be during a time when Obama’s foreign policy is collapsing and the administration is mired in scandals.But the the big deal here is how the New York Times joins Clinton’s battlespace prep with this unsourced report, citing “private conversations,” in which Abu Khattala is said to have launched the Benghazi attack to take “revenge” against the “Innocence of Muslims” video — the controversial online film which was the basis for the administration’s Susan Rice talking points after the attack of September 11, 1012.

Khattala was mocking the U.S. so openly that many journalists met and talked to him about it.

Mr. Abu Khattala, 41, wearing a red fez and sandals, added his own spin. Contradicting the accounts of many witnesses and the most recent account of the Obama administration, he contended that the attack had grown out of a peaceful protest against a video made in the United States that mocked the Prophet Muhammad and Islam.

After Colonel Qaddafi fell, Mr. Abu Khattala was one of the disgruntled veterans of the uprising who kept Benghazi on edge. Though he had friends among the militia leaders of the city who were close to American and British diplomats who took residence in the city, he kept his distance from foreign diplomats and rallied his own supporters to protest what he viewed as foreign interference in Libya’s affairs.

So what changed?
Hillary is running for president and needs cover.
Why else would their story change?

Read more and a hat tip to Gateway Pundit and AMERICAN POWER LINE AND Soopermexican

Vote Tally Count Payroll tax cut, unemployment extension

House and Senate Roll Call Votes below:
WASHINGTON — With members of both parties expressing distaste at some of the particulars, Congress on Friday voted to extend payroll tax cuts and unemployment benefits and sent the legislation to President Obama, ending a contentious political and policy fight

The vote in the House was 293 to 132 with Democrats, who are in the minority, carrying the proposal over the top with the acquiescence of almost as many Republicans. The Senate followed within minutes and approved the measure on a vote of 60 to 36. New York Times

Vote Details House Vote. Click on different”Blue Sorts” below” for individual Votes Gov Track

VOTE Details House Vote:







[Sort by Name] [Sort by Party]


Vote Details Senate Vote Details:

Senate Vote on Conference Report: H.R. 3630: Temporary Payroll Tax Cut Continuation Act of 2011

Number: Senate Vote #22 in 2012 [primary source:]
Date: Feb 17, 2012 11:58AM
Result: Conference Report Agreed to
Bill: H.R. 3630: Temporary Payroll Tax Cut Continuation Act of 2011






[Sort by Name] [Sort by Party]


%d bloggers like this: