Media Bias—Hillary’s Magic Carpet Ride

Only days after Obama’s inauguration, CBS launched Hillary Clinton on a magic carpet ride with a gracious interview between her and her boss Barack Obama. There appeared to be a lot of backslapping, high fives, and innuendos about Hillary’s political future. The only thing missing was a chest bump and a bumper sticker—Hillary 2016. Most viewers failed to understand the significance of that meet and greet, and were unaware of the bias. Instead, most will be following the crumbs—just like the siblings in the Hansel and Gretel fairy tale—and they will meander their way to the gingerbread house to be eaten. Not by a wicked witch, but by a well-intended government.

Missing a chest bump

A presidential journey would be near impossible for anyone—Hillary Clinton included—without a number of dominoes suitably arranged and then falling in place. If you ask a conservative, the task of electing Hillary has already been self-assigned by the media, and other social groups, e.g., Hollywood actors and movie directors, PETA, Moveon.org, Sierra Club…

Political Coup of the Decades

That prediction sounds like a long stretch. Especially given Hillary’s recent exit from her position as Secretary of State. Nevertheless, the media has big cheese to slice and it will be epic in proportion—as—back-to-back elections of minorities.

In spite of the political blows Hillary has taken during botched hype blaming an anti-Muslim video for the Benghazi attack, she is re-emerging as the latest “darling” for the media. It’s not that the media intend to dump Obama; they will simply move him to second page or arrange him as garnish on Hill’s political voyage. With the election 4 years out, it seems to me they have already began pressing her clothes, smoothing her wrinkles, and catching the flattering pose. Case in point; Benghazi—and the medias’ attempt to transform it into a non-issue. When challenged about whether the Embassy attack was by protesters or terrorists Hillary said, “What difference does it make?” The media didn’t blink, they nodded.

We lied, they died—What difference does it make?

However, not everyone believes the media is biased—but Obama does. The following quote is from a recent interview with Barack by Franklin Foer and Chris Hughes from  The New Republic.

“One of the factors is going to be how media shapes debate. If a republican member of congress is not punished on Fox News or Rush Limbaugh for working with Democrats, then you’ll see more of them doing it.”

Greta Van Susteren from Fox News fired back on her blog Gretawire.

“Apparently President Obama wants his usual pass and Fox challenges his polices—which happens to be the media’s job.”

In my opinion the media is already in Hillary’s front pocket—imbued with the same journalistic watermark and ink-stained fingerprints that Barack enjoyed during his presidency and his reelection. The media’s greatest asset is their ability to shift public opinion by not only what they  report, but by what they chose to ignore. Media bias studies suggest the media reports less frequently on substantive events that may shed negative news on their favored politician. This political bias is based on two concepts; an effect of party affiliation, of which journalists are 80% democrats; and what is known as kennel blindness. That, by definition, is a psychological condition that renders one incapable of seeing faults in their own backyard. Those inflected with these biases tend to twist and distort information to favor their candidate or agenda.

For instance, biased individuals would not have noticed that during Bush’s presidency the focus on negative world events were heightened, Military deaths were reported more frequently, and the price of gas and the cost of inflation were center stage. In fact, the media, and others, were relentless in their accusation that the high cost of fuel ($1.87) was due to Bush’s repaying a debt to his oil buddies.

In addition, while Bush was in office, Dan Rather began each broadcast featuring the death of a soldier. Rather’s hyped political ideology and inventive journalism failed to disseminate information without bias, which eventually lead to his being ousted from CBS. Many journalists, like Dan Rather, have spent most of their careers unchallenged in their political views, and they began “spinning” out of control. This created fertile ground for a perspective that wasn’t being voiced.

Eventually, conservative viewers began tuning out and searching for news that was less biased or at least more in line with their political views. By the late 80’s early 90’s media bias became so void in balanced ideology and information that oppositional talk shows began cropping up—most notably Rush Limbaugh. Soon, the conservative news show, Fox News, would become the dominate source for an information starved public. Even though Fox is not as “balanced” as they self-report, they have become the Watch Dog in a field of Carnival Barker’s for liberal news and views.

Two must watch videos Gas Price Hypocrisy and Proving Media Bias.

Working the crowds for Liberal politicians

I’ll end this article with a quote by George Santayana “By nature’s kindly disposition, most questions, which it is beyond a man’s power to answer, do not occur to him at all.”

Warning: Cars are being Vandalized with Obama Bumper Stickers

Here is a friendly way to help fellow citizens who’s cars have been vandalize with Obama bumper stickers. (See image below)

Hi Friend,

I just wanted to let you know that some knucklehead vandalized your car by slapping an Obama sticker on it. The last thing you want is to be driving around all day, looking like an idiot. Take care, A Good Samaritan.

Click here for a PDF printable copy of the above text

I would create a similar text warning about Senator Bill Nelson bumper stickers, but none have been found to date.

Do it for a friend, they would want to know!

Whom do you Trust?

Many thanks to my Liberal Friends who inspire me to write…I would be at a loss for material if it weren’t for you!

Today’s society has become a house divided. In my opinion this division is manifested for political gain— by either side—and is intentionally rooted in the strong emotion of hate. It serves the left best where there is division and that division lives off hate because hate creates illogical and contorted viewpoints.

This writing was born out of a failure to exchange thoughtful dialogue between two intelligent people. It began when I responded to the accusations that “Fox News is racist” (or at least it was implied) and a worthless channel that distorts the truth with its listening audience [of] blind sponges.  “No news is better than Faux News.”

Fox News as viewed by Liberals

That came from a liberal friend—I’ll call him Aaron. One of the reasons I took the time to respond to Aaron, and the flawed study he quoted, is because I know he is an intelligent person—clouded judgment, yes. Stupid, no. He probably didn’t read the actual study, since more than half the study group thought Occupy Wall Streeters were Republicans.

As we all know, and have experienced, hate affects our judgment and the way we react to information. It also affects which information we choose to believe and what information we choose to ignore. In other words—hate blinds intelligent people.

Liberals, like Aaron, refuse to acknowledge our country is failing in a monumental way. I lived in Detroit in the late 60’s and experienced hate first hand by a group of young blacks (literally, first hand). I learned to be more guarded and eventually moved to Florida. I was angry when it happened, but I understood why they, rightfully, had so much anger. Today the evidence of failed socialism is encapsulated in Detroit and in states like California and New York. Yet still, the left wants to blame others for their demise. Today Detroit is a wasteland of bankrupt ideology. The only thing left standing in Detroit is the staleness of hate. Detroit and California have a few things in common.  Detroit was the birth place of capitalism, free enterprise and the invention of modern-day production—their financial growth eventually fed socialist ideology and policy.  California is a state with the most opportunity—the gateway of transportation by sea, beautiful beaches, pristine mountains, and a diversity of climates unknown in any other state in our union. And, similar to Detroit, their financial growth fed into socialist ideology and policy. They both have a money tree being plucked by Liberal politicians (or more correctly, had a money tree). It would seem simple enough for anyone with a grade school education to connect the dots between success of entrepreneurialism and its demise by overzealous government, taxation, and regulation. Below are two maps indicating the correlation of this phenomenon.

Failing states are indicated in the darker color

Anyone looking at those maps with average intelligence would at least scratch their head in thought—unless they are blinded by hate or some other agenda. My liberal friend is probably scratching his ass rather than his head.

Strong Obama States indicated in Blue

Intelligent people look beyond actions and try to identify the cause behind those actions. Today, hate is used by politicians as a tool of motivation to bring out the vote. Every word from Obama and the left stirs the pot of anger and avoids the dialogue of their failed policy. That or they

shift the blame, usually on Bush. Some of it is deserved, especially when he caved to the liberally controlled congress.

Democrat politicians are taking advantage of the poor by creating the idea that successful people are inherently evil. Obama knows that, and that is why his campaign will drive a wedge into “evil capitalism” and the “evil wealthy.”  Truth is to be ignored by many on the left and replaced with the Utopian idea of “equality for all.” I’ll put that in the same bucket as “World Peace” and “Coexist“. It’s a nice dream, and we should always work toward peace, but most of us live in reality, not fantasy. Unless, of course you’re from the land of Disney.

Club Exclusive

The easiest path to riches is to be born into it or steal it. Since we can’t choose our parents, the only other fast-track to wealth would be stealing. I hope Bernie Madoff, a modern day Jesse James, will cause you to rethink that option. Besides, if you don’t have a thief’s mentality, the money will haunt you.

It was a good ride

Two other paths to riches are either winning the lottery or working your way to wealth. The lottery sounds enticing, but the odds of being struck by lightning is more probable than picking a winning number. With my luck I’d win the lottery, and then be struck dead by lightning.

Short of becoming a career politician, that leaves only one practical approach; one has to earn money, save as much as possible, and invest wisely in a productive activity.

Smith, a very wealthy Texan spoke during a radio interview. He said, “For the first ten years of my marriage you wouldn’t live as my wife and I did. For the following years you couldn’t live as we did.”

The interviewer asked, “What do you mean by that Mr. Smith?”

Smith answered, “We lived in a cheap apartment, had no conveniences, no furniture, and we worked twelve hour days. I didn’t own a pair of shoes without holes worn in the bottom.”

“So how did you get ahead?”

“We invested in my business and plowed back the profits.”

“But now you’re very well off?”

The business grew and we continued to live frugally. Most people wouldn’t live the way we lived for ten years.”

“What was the point?” the interviewer asked.

Smith answered, “Do you remember what I said at the start?”

“I’m not sure I understand?”

“Well,” Smith drawled, “I said that during the first ten years of my marriage that you wouldn’t live as my wife and I did. During the next ten years you couldn’t live the way we lived!”

I went into business for myself for several reasons. One was that I do not work well with others.  When I operated my business, I made a couple of friends who were also business owners; they struggled to make a living. Earl was a struggling independent jeweler with his place sandwiched between larger stores in the shopping center; he operated a 600 square-foot store and watch repair service in Belleair Bluffs. Earl rapidly approached sixty years old, and his “hole-in-the-wall” operation catered mainly to an older local crowd. Like many merchants, he was finding it more difficult to operate with competition from the big chain stores. I was visiting my friend one day, when the discussion turned in a novel direction.

Earl said, “You know Mike, you and belong to a very exclusive club!”

“Oh, and what club is that?”

Earl continued, “Well, if you work for the government or a company like Eckerd’s or MacDonald’s, you’ve got to be paid minimum wage. On the other hand, if you operate a small business like you and me, you’re exempt from the law. The government doesn’t care if you fail to make 50 cents an hour! But if you make 50 cents, you’d better pay taxes on it!”

“That’s how it is for me,” I said. “At the start I killed myself working long hours seven days a week to make very little. Now I have both part-time workers and a full-time employee. My full-time guy takes home more than I do. In the end, I would do it again, because I’m my own man and I don’t answer to a single boss. I deal with people straightforwardly; customers either love me or hate me for my forthrightness.”

“When reports of wealthy businessmen emerge in the press,” Earl said, “they neglect an important part of the story.”

“What’s that Earl?”

“Millionaires accumulate their wealth at a dollar an hour!”

Earl smiled at me. I knew what he meant about the long hours and low pay. The secret, I thought, was hanging onto the money that cried out to be spent. Self-discipline, frugality, and saving made the difference, but most people cannot get beyond immediate gratification.