And Rightly So… » Media

Archive for the 'Media' Category

Obama Thugs Servicing NYT Media Whores

Posted by Raven on 15th June 2009

Everyone knows the NYT is biased and liberal. The paper went out of it’s way to destroy President Bush’s policies that prevented terrorist attacks; the paper went out of it’s way to expose national security directives designed to do the same thing. The paper is, in my opinion, an organization worthy of being charged with treason. Too bad we can’t do that…

Media whores performing editorial fellatio on Bambs, in exchange for…access.


Photobucket

“The cliché of the Upper West Side liberal getting the NYT and bagels on Sundays is still very much alive,” said Democratic strategist Phil Singer. “But make no mistake: The NYT is still the gold standard for any elected official — Republican or Democrat.”

Still, the instinct to see the world revolving around 620 Eighth Ave. in Manhattan is an emphatically Democratic phenomenon.

“A Democratic White House cares much more what The New York Times says,” said Vanity Fair’s Todd S. Purdum, who previously covered the White House for the Times. For many staffers in a Democratic White House, he continued, “The New York Times has been the true north of mainstream journalism.”

Several Times reporters and editors, in interviews with POLITICO, described a significant departure from the Bush years, with the Obama team both aggressively reaching out to them and paying closer attention to their copy.

Exactly why we cannot trust any political news that the Times spews out at us. Period. And perhaps a reason why the Times is losing money, readership and respect. The bagels are rotten and the mere mention of liberals eating them makes me ill- and I thank my lucky stars I HATE the damn things. So, now we know that Obambi officials care more about what the NYT thinks, than say…oh- progressives and others who believe the Times is too far right.

Too bad all Presidents aren’t equal in the eyes of the Times. I used to be a subscriber, but canceled out shortly after September 11th 2001. For some reason, that day remains forever etched in my memory. But the Times’ quickly chose to forget, and in doing so it sabotaged US security due to it’s editorial slant and policy. We are, living in pre 9-11 times again, and Obama can only shine in those times.

  • Share/Bookmark

Posted in Liberal Lunatics, Media, National Politics, Obama | 2 Comments »

Descent into the Maelstrom-I: Now it’s TV talk show hosts joking about statutory* rape of politicans’ daughters

Posted by civil truth on 11th June 2009

[*Newsflash: Dave Letterman last night (6/10) claims he wasn't making jokes about statutory rape, merely jokes about rape...and he's totally down with that.
Excuse me, I need to throw up...
Commentary to follow in a separate post...]

The recent campaign of misogyny by men from the left to dehumanize and subjugate conservative women who speak out in public continues to spiral ever downward to new and unprecedented depths of depravity. In the past week, we have now reached the pit of public rape fantasies.

But first, let’s go back to August 2008.

Read the rest of this entry »

  • Share/Bookmark

Posted in Civil Truth, Damn Hot Politicians, Damn Hot Wimmin', Liberal Lunatics, Media, National Politics, STUPID Men | 1 Comment »

They Shame Us…Pink Cows

Posted by Raven on 13th May 2009

The old Pink Code hags are at it again…this time going after Donald Rumsfeld and his wife, at the White House Correspondence Dinner the other night. Note the SILENCE from the media on this.

Freakin old cows. They need to get a life and make something of it.

H/T to Gateway Pundit.

  • Share/Bookmark

Posted in Liberal Lunatics, Media | No Comments »

Star Trek – I watched it…

Posted by Duncan on 12th May 2009

I saw the new Star Trek last night. For the most part I was highly entertained. I could easily see all of the characters and the young actors, especially Zachary Quinto (who plays Sylar on “Heroes”) does an AWESOME job as Spock, and even looks the part. Some Star Trek purists might not like the “change” in direction, if you will, in the plot line, and the entire “Grandfather Paradox” is something the writers didn’t even think of, and takes a minor suspension of belief. However, J.J. Abrams (maker of Lost and the movie “Cloverfield”) did a great job of breathing fresh life into this franchise. I would highly recommend this movie to those who have enjoyed Star Trek before, just enter with an open mind…


EMBED-Beam Me Up, Hotties – Watch more free videos

  • Share/Bookmark

Posted in Duncan, Media | 1 Comment »

Great Star Wars/Obama/Fawning Media Analogy

Posted by Duncan on 2nd May 2009

newtoon

It really does seem that this is how its working…

Ofcourse, someone saw this coming last April, 2008.

  • Share/Bookmark

Posted in Duncan, Elections have Consequences, Media, Obama | 2 Comments »

Helen Thomas

Posted by Raven on 2nd May 2009

Normally I don’t get into making fun of people’s looks (unless your name is Meatbrain, of course). But I couldn’t resist this. OMG. She is one UGLY LADY.


Photobucket

I need my eyes washed out!

  • Share/Bookmark

Posted in Humor, Media | 8 Comments »

Assclown Press Threatening Bloggers Again?

Posted by Kim on 7th April 2009

Looks like the AP will once again attempt to nuzzle those who share it’s articles…namely- bloggers. Keep in mind the AP (assclown Press) is made up of media organization leaders- most of whom have a (left leaning) political agenda. Is this an attempt to engineer the news? I think it is.

  • Share/Bookmark

Posted in Blogging, Liberal Lunatics, Media | 1 Comment »

The Gray Hag Wants You To Be Irresponsible

Posted by Raven on 13th March 2009

What, exactly is the NYT advocating here?

Thoughts on Walking Away From Your Home Loan
If you’re among the millions of people who will not qualify for the Obama administration’s program to help troubled homeowners, you’re probably wondering what you’re supposed to do now.

Perhaps you no longer have enough income to pay your loans. Or you can afford the payments but don’t qualify for refinancing under the new plan because the value of your home is too far below the balance of the loan. If you’re far enough underwater, you’re probably questioning the wisdom of writing a monthly check on a place that may take 10 or 15 years to get back to the value it had two or three years ago.
[...]
In an economic environment like this one, however, the consequences of giving up on your mortgage may not be as painful as they were a few years ago. Yes, it’s almost always preferable to negotiate a better deal on your existing mortgage than to walk away. But if you can’t work things out with your lender, you probably won’t be sued. You shouldn’t receive a major tax bill either. And the damage to your credit will not be permanent or insurmountable.

I get the feeling the Old Gray Hag is opining that it’s ok to ditch your personal responsibilities; and I suspect the Hag believes if enough folks do this, the feds will HAVE NO CHOICE but to step in to SAVE us all. Which I am sure will be the subject of yet another editorial this leftist mouthpiece paper produces.

  • Share/Bookmark

Posted in Bailout or Handout, Liberal Lunatics, Media | No Comments »

Distinctions between cultural and religious practices?

Posted by Raven on 22nd February 2009

Is it religion or culture?

Beheading, that is.

The crime was so brutal, shocking and rife with the worst possible stereotypes about their faith that some U.S. Muslims thought the initial reports were a hoax.

The harsh reality of what happened in an affluent suburb of Buffalo, N.Y. – the beheading of 37-year-old Aasiya Hassan and arrest of her estranged husband in the killing – is another crucible for American Muslims.

Here was a couple that appeared to be the picture of assimilation and tolerance, co-founders of a television network that aspired to improve the image of Muslims in a post 9-11 world.

Yep. I for one wasn’t shocked. Nothing surprises me when it comes to Islam, the Religion of Peace.

The killing and its aftermath raise hard questions for Muslims – about gender issues, about distinctions between cultural and religious practices, and about differing interpretations of Islamic texts regarding the treatment of women.

“Muslims don’t want to talk about this for good reason,” said Saleemah Abdul-Ghafur, a Muslim author and activist. “There is so much negativity about Muslims, and it sort of perpetuates it. The right wing is going to run with it and misuse it. But we’ve got to shine a light on this issue so we can transform it.”

There is evidence of movement in that direction in the 10 days since the Hassan slaying. In an open letter to American Muslim leaders, Imam Mohamed Hagmagid Ali of Sterling, Va., vice president of the Islamic Society of North America, said “violence against women is real and cannot be ignored.”

As with terrorism, not all victims are Muslim, but those who perform these barbaric acts are Muslim. An odd coincidence? Violence against women is a common and perpetual theme in Islam. Women of Islam have never had many rights, or a voice. It starts in their childhoods- when little girls are denied educations and then sold off to old men in marriage arrangements.

He urged that imams and community leaders never second-guess a woman in danger, and said women seeking divorces because of physical abuse should not be viewed as bringing shame to their families.

Muslim women’s advocates consider the statement significant after years of indifference in a community which has seen only recent progress – for example, the opening of shelters for battered Muslim women in a few major cities.

“This is a horrible tragedy, but it gives us a window,” said Abdul-Ghafur, editor of the anthology “Living Islam Out Loud: American Muslim Women Speak.”"The next time a woman comes to her imam and says, ‘He hit me,’ the reply might not be, ‘Be patient, sister, is there something you did, sister? Is there something you can do?’ The chances are greater the imam will say, ‘This is unacceptable.’”

(Emphasis mine) Years of indifference, eh? Not according to American liberals, who will always defend the Religion of Peace. Particularly readers like Reasic, who like to pretend that Muslims everywhere denounce acts of terror…he even told us to Google these so called denouncements. Yet, as stated in this article, it is the culture of this religion, that makes these things acceptable to it’s members.

At the South Bay Islamic Association in San Jose, Calif., Imam Tahir Anwar said he preached at Friday prayer services about keeping peace in the family and denounced physical and emotional domestic violence.

“I wouldn’t say (the problem) is particular to the Muslim community, but to the immigrant community whether you’re Muslim or otherwise,” Anwar, whose parents are from India, said in an interview. “Women don’t speak up about it. It’s a taboo that all immigrant communities sort of face.”

Of Islam’s potential role in the Hassan slaying, Anwar said: “All religions have texts that can be misinterpreted. Good people regardless of faith would never do something like this.”

Of course domestic violence is not a product of Islam…however, cutting off the heads of another human being IS strikingly a trademark of Islam. Let’s not allow any misinterpretation here.

While sermons like Anwar’s are encouraging, other Muslim clerics in the U.S. likely preached that Aasiya Hassan could have avoided her fate by being more obedient, said Muqtedar Khan, an associate professor of political science and international relations at the University of Delaware.

“The imam has to be enlightened enough to recognize this violence happens, to not hide in denial or somehow blame it on American culture,” said Khan, author of “American Muslims: Bridging Faith and Freedom.”

“In order to essentially condemn violence against women, they will have to treat women with greater respect. Unfortunately, the level of enlightenment among imams in North America varies significantly.”

Exactly. When we have Imam’s making these statements, why can’t our own liberal fellow citizens understand this? Why the silence? Silence is easy, that’s why. And, it is a lot easier to blame America, than it is to blame the religion practiced by Muslims- which is the biggest factor in their culture. That culture is full of hate.

Asra Nomani, a Muslim journalist, author and activist from Morgantown, W.Va., challenged Muslims who say the murder has no link to Islamic teachings. While Islam does not sanction domestic violence or murder, a literal reading of a controversial verse in the Quran taught in some mosques can lead to honor killings and murder, she said.

“It’s sort of like the typical reaction to terrorism in the community, where people want to say, ‘This had nothing to do with Islam,’” Nomani said. “Well, it doesn’t have anything to do with your interpretation of Islam that teaches you can’t kill innocent people. But terrorism, violence, honor killing – they are all part of ideological problems we have in the community we need to eradicate.”

The passage – Chapter 4, Verse 34 – has been widely translated to sanction physical discipline against disobedient wives. There is disagreement about to what degree and whether it’s punitive or symbolic.

The verse is cited “all the time” to justify domestic violence, just as people of other faiths cite scriptures to support oppression of women, said Salma Abugideri of the Peaceful Families Project, which offers training and workshops to combat domestic violence in Muslim communities.

The verse, is followed literally, and Muslim women have suffered tremendously, because of it. Dress it down all they want, it is the source for much of the oppression and violence these women experience. Until we all see this, and stand up and call Muslims out on it, IT will continue. We can make all the excuses in the world. But that’s not our job. Muslims need to condemn their own, more often, more loudly and with meaning. Until they do, it’s very difficult to not see Islam as the Religion of Hate.

  • Share/Bookmark

Posted in Current Events, Islamification, Media | 2 Comments »

Bloggers and Other Internet Users: MUZZLE IT

Posted by Raven on 18th February 2009

The other day I linked to an article that described the efforts of some, to create a NEW INTERNET. It was a boring read, to say the least. I also read a couple other stories, and will share them now.

Nothing fair about Fairness Doctrine

Americans are about to learn that when it comes to protecting their civil liberties, they can’t relax no matter which party is in power in Washington.

After spending eight years wailing about President George W. Bush’s relentless disregard for the Bill of Rights, Democrats are preparing to launch an assault on the most precious individual freedom of all — free speech.

They are trying to shut down conservative talk radio, the primary source of criticism of their programs and policies.
[...]
Stifling dissent is a favored weapon of those who are convinced they know what’s best for the people and are willing to trample the people’s rights to give it to them.

We all know this. No news here.

What is interesting, and I’m surprised at the lack of linking to this editorial:

Time for a muzzle
The online world of lies and rumor grows ever more vicious. Is it time to rethink free speech?

Speech now travels farther faster than the Founding Fathers – or the judges who created much of modern free speech law – could have dreamed. The Web has brought a new reach to the things we say about others, and created a vast potential audience for arguments that would once have unfolded in a single room or between two telephones.
[...]
Now, some legal scholars are beginning to argue that new technologies have changed the balance of power between the right to speak and the right to be left alone. At conferences, in law review articles, and, increasingly, in the courts, some lawyers are suggesting that the time has come to rethink some of the hallowed protections that the law gives speech in this country, especially if that speech is online.
[...]
At stake is the basic question of what we will allow people to say and do online
, whether it’s on a message board, a Craigslist ad, or a YouTube video – and who gets to set the rules governing what’s OK and what’s not. As the Web grows increasingly interactive, the system of informal and formal rules that determines appropriate behavior is only beginning to emerge, and thinkers on both sides of the debate agree that courts can go a long way toward shaping it.
[...]

The MUzzle Piece goes on to describe different ways to hold web site owners accountable for their content, including any comments left by web site users.

This all comes together, quite neatly, when we read this article, which is full of revealing ideas but is vigorously denied as being factual. I believe what is written here occurred, and one Henry Waxman didn’t like being caught trying to kill free speech.

First radio, now the Web?

Media analysts and bloggers are warning that fresh efforts to bring back the so-called Fairness Doctrine could go too far, following a report that one prominent Democrat is looking into ways to apply the media control standards to the Internet.

The Fairness Doctrine is a policy created decades ago but abolished in the late 1980s that required broadcasters to provide opposing views on controversial issues.

While some Democrats have talked about reviving the policy, The American Spectator reported Monday that Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Calif., is taking the call to a new level. The article said aides to the chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee met last week with Federal Communications Commission staff to discuss ways to not only enact those policies but give Waxman’s panel greater oversight over the Internet.

“It’s all about diversity in media,” the Spectator quoted a House energy committee staff member as saying. “Does one radio station or one station group control four of the five most powerful outlets in one community? … Does one heavily trafficked Internet site present one side of an issue and not link to sites that present alternative views?”

Can we see Daily Kos linking to Malkin on each and every post written? Can we see the bonehead Meaty bothering to research and take time to link to the opposing view of every post he publishes? I SURE AS HELL WON’T DO IT…this is what free speech is about. It’s not without consequences. We own what we say and write. We’re not always correct. But we do have a right to speak freely and without any interference from the government. People from ALL sides of the political spectrum should stand up to this nonsense UNFairness Doctrine and reject it, wholesale and in any form.

  • Share/Bookmark

Posted in Blogging, Democrats, Liberal Lunatics, Media, Nanny Statism, National Politics | 1 Comment »