Media’s Sellout, Tale of the Toll

From a secluded and undisclosed location, I have been thinking up wacky things to write. Not actually but play along. This time I have found yet another provocative idea.

It seems the outrageous and provocative get all the press’s attention these days. Well, except on the right, where we get banned or marginalized for saying what sounds crazy to media’s ears. In that strain, this must offend them and presses their ridicule buttons.

So in this episode of crazy talk with your inflammatory host, this one fits with the other stranger than fiction stuff I’ve thought up for years. “Conspiracies” are so yesterday.

But it starts with the quaint story of Obama we all know. Now that he has finally been out of office for a few years, where is the little scum merchant and what has he been up to? Oh, he’s hobnobbing with the rich and powerful. He was sailing in paradise, selling faux books, still giving occasional lectures that “this is not who we are” and purchasing his own multi-million dollar abode on the Martha’s Vineyard coast. The world is his oyster.

Between all that, I’m sure he has time to follow the news. Remember he always counted on it to tell him what he did not know when in office. “I just found out in the press, like you,” were code words. Living the high life, it turns out, is not the only thing he dabbles in.

In my scenario, Obama managed to do what no other president has done or maybe no other single person. (yes, you can argue whether he really is a single human being or a poster boy for the global power conglomerate) He managed this accomplishment, or solidified it, before leaving office. Now he is in the catbird seat enjoying the fruits.

Obama now controls the media. That is for all practical purposes and matters of official capacity. He controls the whole cabal of the national press. He cannot continue on without them and they cannot operate without him attached to the masthead. How is this you might ask? It’s really very simple. They gave up their loyalty and freedom of the press long ago. Being out of office means nothing… yet it means everything at the same time.

He can finally assert his stealthy but direct control in the way he couldn’t before. It doesn’t involve daily phone calls or meetings with boards, though it easily could. He doesn’t have to. That may have been a subtle seduction at first but progressed over time.

For all intents and purposes he owns the media cabal. They sold themselves to Obama dirt cheap, he only now has realized the totality of that control. He is hardly what you’d expect from any other former president. I do like saying former but that means very little. With the control of the press apparatus, he does not have to be the president anymore. It makes no difference. He is the guy at the top and what he says goes. No he doesn’t have to busy himself in daily personnel decisions. All that mundane stuff is just done in his honor.

And the American press know it whether they care to admit it or not. They are fine with this incestuous relationship but it is a done deal. They are at his beckon call if he avails himself of it or not. There is no question it operates for him exclusively. Sure, that is where the global control comes in you might say, as it does with his ideology. Though he is the king of the national press and media operation.

For the press cabal, this is for keeps. They are there explicitly to defend him and his legacy. They are there to keep history being written a certain way, to his benefit. They are there to guarantee it just like there was an insurance poliy in the event Trump was elected. Actually, it is all part of the same cabal. It operates to protect Obama. You could not even hope for a better situation than that.

If you want proof of this relationship and what it means in events, you only have to look at the aftermath coverage of the Mueller Report and the Report on Comey last week. Rabid press coverage validates this incestuous pattern. They will do anything to protect Obama, whatever it takes or costs. Medias’ fate is wrapped with Obama’s legacy and vice versa.

At first they seemed like a cute couple in puppy love, and then evolved into the evil power duo which functions as one criminal enterprise. Slaves to agenda, they could not function apart from each other. Someone has to to say what is obviously the rotten reality.

Right Ring | Bullright

Crowd Sourcing Surveillance Information

Sharyl Attkisson has turned to crowd sourcing to find the culprits. Nothing like getting that big, cold wall from the government when private citizens want justice.

$50,000 Whistleblower Award Offered in Unlawful Government Surveillance Case

May 30, 2019 by Sharyl Attkisson | Sharyl Attkinson

Reward: Up to $50,000

Many of you are familiar with the forensically-proven Government spying on me and my family. It’s one of multiple documented surveillance abuses by our Government.

Unfortunately, the Department of Justice refuses to act on the forensic evidence, investigate its own, and punish those responsible. The only option left for ordinary citizens who are targeted for abuse is to self-fund a fight for justice in court. I’m now in year four of my fight.

Even here, the battle is daunting. The Government holds the evidence, the Government uses our tax money to withhold the evidence, then the courts declare the case cannot go forward because we cannot list the exact names of the federal agents responsible— names which only the Government knows.

Today, we are announcing a substantial monetary reward, up to $50,000.00, for anyone providing information that helps us identify names of those responsible for the Government surveillance operation against me. * …./

See: https://sharylattkisson.com/2019/05/50000-whistleblower-award-offered/

It’s a shame it comes to this and seems that this is what it takes, if anything can reveal it. Funny how you never hear squat from Libs about this case. Actually, they criticize her as if it were her doing, or she is to blame. Or they deny it completely. But it happened and, as the story goes, if it can happen to her it can certainly happen to anyone.

Open Letter To The Mainstream Media

I write in sympathy to your current predicament. I know you have an extreme lack of credibility and standing with the public. Or maybe you are still in denial? You offend them and they offend you. I know it upsets you.

I feel your pain; but I cannot validate it.

The problem is that it is not Trump’s fault. That must be hard for you to accept, too. Yet it is the truth. Just repeat the words: “our credibility deficit is not Trump’s fault.”

It was not Trump’s fault that before the 2016 election you jumped on the Hillary bandwagon, with no reservations. You were doing her bidding well before the primaries.

When the election did come, by then you had set the perception that she was the winner by all standards and could not lose. Trump had nothing to do with your willful bias. He was not whispering in your ear to give favorable treatment to Hillary, forcing you to do her cleanup and dirty work.

He did not tell you to make things up about him and his supporters just like you all did about Tea Parties. He didn’t choose all your negative coverage of himself and positive coverage for Hillary. That was not in his power or within his influence to do.

He didn’t make you into card-carrying members of the resistance. He didn’t tell you to brand his supporters as racists, bigots, or even domestic terrorists. But you implied they were dumb, uneducated grievance hustlers who were generations out of step with the times. (talk about projection)

We came to the party only to take our part. You came to blacklist us. Sure, you couldn’t quite get the job done, but you expected it to take a toll. To some degree it did. Though you couldn’t defeat or destroy us. After all, you had been trying more subtly to do that for years. But we were not going away. In fact, we were the original resistance. So you fully embraced the banner of resistance after the election. Trump did not make you do that. He only pointed it out. You demurred any criticism because that is the kind of people you are.

We don’t matter. When you ran the daily 24/7 hate Trump media for his first two years, hyping the resistance movement and impeachment, you dug in your heels of sedition. With every leak and anonymous source you could muster, you blazed an historical trail, aligning yourselves with a coup well under way from the first day of Trump’s presidency.

Yes, I can sympathize with your pain and agony of it all. Well, I can because we have felt that prejudice against us from the public for decades. Your part in that campaign against us has not gone unrecognized. We are well aware of it and your attitude against we the people. We know how you feel about the people and flyover country.

We know how you despise the people’s mindset… and their choice.

So when Donald Trump said some members of the mainstream media – not all — were enemies of the people, he was right. We already knew that. You just confirmed it. When you were offended by that comment, it was not our fault. You did it. When you tried to spin yourselves into victims of that remark, it fell on deaf ears because we have always been the real victims of your schemes.

We get to vote, and were determined to vote regardless what you thought of us. See, you get to cast your vote everyday, as the elitists you are. You want to control dialogue and you couldn’t. The conversation went on around you, even factoring in your heavy hand at the ballot. But you could not control the discussion or the election results. So I can really identify with how you must feel. We’ve felt that way for years and you never cared.

Yes, we all know exactly what it is like to be outcast by the public as troublemakers and crazies. But we were not looking to validate our victimhood. We didn’t have to. It is prima facie in any honest assessment. Along comes media now claiming to be the righteous victims of slander, smear or character assassination to vindicate their cause. It is dishonest. It is self-serving, it is agenda driven and, finally, it is very political.

Now you have laid the record bare for all to see. Only you want your trashed credibility back on a golden platter. That’s just not how any of this works.

Worse than all that, you have also lost credibility with the Left, your handlers and allies. You promised and built up their hopes that you would assist in taking down this president.

When the Mueller report came out and didn’t declare the collusion you promised, your radical base of consumers recoiled. Their hearts and trust were broken. So you have lost on both sides, with your enemies and your allies. Hurts, doesn’t it?

That should have taught you something. But it was your stubborn choices you made every step of the way that are to blame, not Trump. We didn’t destroy your credibility. You did that yourself. We only supplied the means. Remember reporters demanding apologies from Trump? By the way, did you ever apologize for the way you treated the Tea Parties? No, it’s all part of the long record now. It lives on to prove to anyone honestly looking.

You are the victims of your own bias and hatred. Thursday will only validate what we all knew. It will expose you for the liars you were all along. But Trump didn’t do it to you.

It might be time to take some stock and dust off that first amendment to see what is really in it. There is more there than your beloved freedom. And last I checked, you weren’t.

Right Ring | Bullright

Let’s go with media bias for a 1,000

We don’t have to take it from conservative media. Here’s Ted Koppel actually making the good case against the MSM agenda.

Ted Koppel: New York Times, Washington Post ‘decided as organizations’ that Trump is bad for United States

By Brian Flood | Fox News

Journalism legend Ted Koppel feels that The New York Times and Washington Post have both “decided as organizations” that President Trump is bad for America.

“I’m terribly concerned that when you talk about the New York Times these days, when you talk about the Washington Post these days, we’re not talking about the New York Times of 50 years ago. We are not talking about the Washington Post of 50 years ago,” Koppel said on March 7 at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in a clip that was uncovered on Monday by NewsBusters.

“We’re talking about organizations that I believe have, in fact, decided as organizations that Donald J. Trump is bad for the United States,” Koppel said. “We have things appearing on the front page of the New York Times right now that never would have appeared 50 years ago.”

Koppel explained that analysis and commentary didn’t use to appear on the front page, but times have changed since Trump entered the world of politics.

“I remember sitting at the breakfast table with my wife during the campaign after the Access Hollywood tape came out and the New York Times, and I will not offend any of you here by using the language but you know exactly what words were used, and they were spelled out on the front page of the New York Times,” he said. “I turned to my wife and I said, ‘The Times is absolutely committed to making sure that this guy does not get elected.’”

Koppel said Trump’s perception that “the establishment press is out to get him” is indeed accurate.

“He’s not mistaken when so many of the liberal media, for example, described themselves as belonging to the Resistance. What does that mean? That’s not said by people who consider themselves reporters, objective reporters of facts,” Koppel said. “That’s the kind of language that’s used by people who genuinely believe, and I rather suspect with some justification, that Donald Trump is bad for the United States.”

The Times and Post did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

This is hardly the first time Koppel has bashed a mainstream media organization.

Last year, Koppel mocked CNN’s Brian Stelter to his face, telling the “Reliable Sources” host that “CNN’s ratings would be in the toilet without Donald Trump” while on stage for a National Press Club panel discussion.

Stelter responded by asking, “That means what? If ratings are up, that means what?”

Koppel – who anchored ABC News’ “Nightline” for 25 years and has been a working journalist for over four decades — quickly answered.

“The ratings are up, it means you can’t do without Donald Trump. You would be lost without Donald Trump,” Koppel said as Stelter shook his head in disagreement.

“Ted, you know that’s not true,” Stelter said.

“CNN’s ratings would be in the toilet without Donald Trump,” Koppel said as the audience laughed.

There is one little nut he left in there. He said “people who bleive, I suspect with some justification, that Donald Trump is bad for the United States.” Except justification is missing. Opinion is not reason alone for what they do. We never did that en masse to Obama and we had quite the case there for it. Believing he is “bad for America” is not the justification for hatred, resistance and impeachment. There must be real cause.

No, the problem they have with Trump is that he is non-conventional, and they are more than non-conventional in return. If he was conventional, they could apply all their typical radicalism and beat him down. And that would work as usual.

So Trump is somewhat radical in the way he responds. And that is partly why he got elected. It also happens to be the only effective way to react to these rabid leftists.That is the appeal of radicalism, make their own subversive actions hard to respond to.

They don’t want a debate or discussion, no matter how many times they say it. So Ted Koppel inadvertently gets himself caught in a dilemma.

Every time you hear media, politicians or people hypercritically complaining how some problem needs to be dealt with and fixed, remember one thing: they might have a superficial point that does sound good, it is ridiculous in practicality. We must have an effective response to radicalism — no matter what the problem is. Unless you have that, you will not have a real solution. A followup part II is needed for that.

Room with a view and Acosta is in it

No word yet from Babs Streisand if Tuesday was considered a win for her, or if she’ll make good on her promise to flee to Canada.

Though you can pretty much doubt anything they tell you because of the Left’s motivation for saying it in the first place.

It is the same way with media spinoids and liars. Always consider their motives. They hate Trump so much they will do or say practically anything to validate their boiling hatred.

What it is they hate so much, I don’t really know? But leave it to someone like Jim Acosta to make a total spectacle of himself in front of a national audience, as intended.

He was so hyper-obsessed by the use of the word invasion that he nearly collapsed under the sheer emotional strain. So it is the use of a term or word that really bugs him.

The same word that is used in the Constitution. (Art I, II, IV) Bad founders. It is something for our government to be concerned about. Not in Jim Acosta’s book. He’s worried about Russia and its subversive actions yet can dismiss a caravan of thousands, and hordes of people, aimed at overwhelming our border as some peace offering to us.

At what point, how many caravans, how many thousands of people, and how many repeated attempts at crossing the border does it take to get serious about it? But someone calls it an “invasion” and he goes into a frenzy.

Then Acosta also relies on their stock talking point, “we are not an enemy of the people”. How is fake news and CNN not an enemy of the people? They defend an invasion and then discount the whole idea of border security as tyranny.

Who do you want controlling the border, really? Should thugs and hordes of people from Latin America, or wherever, control our border and set immigration policy? Have we turned that power of control over to masses of lawless people outside our country?

Who really controls that border, us or them?

But it is just the word “invasion” that really bothers them and rattles their cage.

Or is illegal invasion now a pre-existing condition we have to protect?

Right Ring | Bullright

The Threat Within America

In their own words:

“We oftentimes had these debates and discussions about ‘out of the streets and into the suites’ — that was the term that was used to describe the swan song of the civil rights movement. … He made a decision and thought he could make a difference by being on the inside.” [emphasis added] — Socialist Workers Party member and University of Minnesota Professor August Nimtz on long time friend Keith Ellison.

See: https://www.centerforsecuritypolicy.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/Ellilson_Burn_This_Book.pdf

Of course Ellison thought he could make a difference by being on the inside. We know that is what he is there for. Most radical leftists start by believing they can make a difference. Then position themselves or act accordingly to carry it out.

Radicalism is not a spectator sport.

H/T to The United West

From the foreword of “Burn This Book” by Trevor Loudon:

“On July 17, 2018, Representative Keith Ellison of Minnesota wrote Amazon CEO Jeffrey Bezos, demanding that his company censor books and other products by those deemed to be “hate groups” by the discredited Southern Poverty Law Center. He called for such materials still in Amazon warehouses to be “destroyed” over the next three months and an end to the company’s publication of similar “physical and digital materials.”

There is reason to believe that you are reading the impetus behind Keith Ellison’s call for book burning. In the course of a July 3rd interview with author Diana West on our nationally syndicated “Secure Freedom Radio” program, I mentioned that we would shortly publish a book about the Congressman’s ominous past and present ties to Marxist and Islamist groups and their agendas.

Since the hard left monitors our show assiduously, word of this publication may well have reached Mr. Ellison before the 17th. And, as the Center for Security Policy Press uses Amazon’s CreateSpace service to publish its many monographs and books, censoring such works – past, as well as future – could prevent readers from seeing this one. That is because the Center for Security Policy is one of the organizations the discredited Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) has falsely characterized as a “hate group.” By pressing Amazon’s Bezos to use the SPLC as the arbiter of what content can be published or maintained in inventory, Rep. Ellison could achieve the censorship of CSP’s products without spedifying us as the target.

As this book by Trevor Loudon amply demonstrates, such stealthy subversiveness is the stock-in-trade of Keith Ellison. His associations dating back to his involvement with the Nation Islam as a student at Wayne State University and continuing to his present —and ongoing —involvement with Muslim Brotherhood fronts and his role as chairman of the radical House Progressive Caucus, Keith Ellison’s record is one of unbroken ties to extremists committed to subverting our country.“

This insight is all the more alarming in light of a dangerously mistaken, but widespread assumption: When an elected official in the United States swears an oath to defend the U.S. Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic, they are presumed to be truthfully saying they are able and willing to do that. Consequently, such representatives of the American people in the U.S. Congress are not subjected to the sort of background investigations aimed at confirming that assumption that is required of, for example, postal employees, securities personnel and school bus drivers.

Unfortunately, as author, filmmaker and national security expert Trevor Loudon documents exhaustively in this volume, Rep. Keith Ellison’s many and longstanding personal associations with groups openly hostile to the principles and even the existence of the U.S. Constitution, would likely make it impossible for him to to pass even the most cursory of security checks.”

Wow, I can think of nothing to add to that. Book is here in PDF form.

Also: Keith Ellison, who does NOT have a MN license to practice law, yet is running for MN Attorney General.

News, email, and this and that

Has Twitter suddenly made email obsolete? You might think so. If you think that the public form of twitter is a substitute for private email, then you don’t understand technology, culture or the dynamic of it all.

It seems the trend is on using Twitter. But until recently it was so limited by character count that it would render it worthless for serious communications. Yet that is probably what some people would like about it, being limited.

But of course it could be an excuse to eliminate email which some people do not want to bother with anymore. I’d like to add that Twitter never will be a replacement for email. And email has not gone the way of the dinosaurs, yet. Too bad if people don’t like to use it or read them. It’s so old fashioned since the social media explosion. Poof, you don’t need email.

Isn’t it interesting that the major news or media centers all prefer everyone use Twitter as a contact method? But these and other businesses are also the same ones who like to use email for news letters and updates — for your convenience of course. But if you want to get in touch with them, they want it on Twitter.

What’s up with the contradiction, Fox and all the rest?

BTW: Fox will be launching its Fox Nation project later in the year. They want you to sign up on the email list for updates. It will be a new subscription service for their viewers. Oh dandy, another avenue of access to their content from most of the same people. But it is subscription-based.

“Fox Nation reveal: Sean Hannity, Laura Ingraham, Tucker Carlson among stars on streaming platform ….Content you love, voices that matter.”

Now if your voice mattered to them at all, why scrub the email option?

Okay, if they really have a new product, why don’t they complete that newness by having some new faces? One of the headliner newbies showcased is Tomi Lahren. How new is she and what expertise does she bring? Born in 1992, maybe that’s what they mean.

I sort of thought having a new format they should have some regular folks. I don’t know, like everyday conservatives or viewers of their content over the years. People that have an opinion and view. There are plenty out there. I see people all over the internet and social media who would add spark to an otherwise recycled format. Fresher than Lahren.

While I think of it, I also remember when Town Hall was rolling out its new model that would shake the earth to its core. It was all hype. Indeed, that was about having a forum of conservative, like minded people writing their own stuff and their collective friends it would bring, along with other news centered content.

Well, it lasted a while and morphed into what you see as Town Hall today. (some here remember those days) Why is it that it is always the everyday normal people that are the problem? No, we need mouthpieces like famous spouters of conservative opinion to tell us what really matters. Sure we do watch because there is nothing else to watch.

“Tweet me, text me, hit me on Instagram,” they say, “or find me on FaceBook.” What if I don’t want to? I just want to email you. Well, it has become a problem. Right about now I am starting to feel like Andy Rooney. Oh, few people would remember who he was.

Maybe I am finally just old or old fashioned?

Still, if you listen now, you can hear the same undercurrent of criticism about Twitter among those same on air personalities starting all over again. ‘The scourge of contacts and feedback.’ The same things you used to hear about bothersome emails.

Someone else doesn’t like or appreciate getting our emails. Congress. Funny that liberals never seem to have that problem. They shout into an elevator and voilà, instant reaction.

Right Ring | Bullright

Press Freedom — unchain their souls

Maybe a post script is needed to my last post on a media cabal in their defense of press hay day. (or their D-day as I’m calling it) Was it too Fake News challenged?

There were some who declined the opportunity to elaborate on the “war,” as some call it, claiming that they do it everyday. Like Seattle Times, who passed on the offer.

So maybe press is not as united as you thought? Don’t bet on it. They just don’t want to make a special national day of it, which they fear may only provide Trump with more evidence of a press conspiracy against his presidency. Surely, some of it will.

However, this sounds more like not wanting to poke Trump — or the people by extension — in the eye while he is already on a tear against the press. A successful one. Not that they are not actively engaged in an effort to undermine and question his legitimacy in every way they can. They are. Just that they do that anyway without a designated day for it.

On the other hand, some are fully engaged in this “war” but they also want to throw ‘shout outs’ to local media for tireless efforts in the press. Lean on the locals for a defense. Yes, noble as local press are, they are not the real issue or problem. That the local media still covers local news and provides a good service never was the problem at the heart of the matter. But should that case even have to be made? Then we have come a long way. So they can wax on their local accomplishments all they want.

Maybe it is a time, though, for press to do a little navel gazing of its own on what their real priorities and goals are. Maybe? But don’t bet there will be lessons learned. They seem far too arrogant for that.

Just as the Seventh Floor was corrupting the greater FBI’s institutional reputation, so is the national press and media diminishing its own credibility. Like the FBI, it was not field agents who did all that, who were the problem. It was leadership. Though the attitudes of leadership do trickle down to rank and file. So too is the case in the national press — all chasing a few stories they consider important. (damn whatever we care about)

We know the stories they want to report, and eventually we know the ones they do not. So do reporters and journalists at large. There are a few good journalists functioning in an against-the-tide way, almost battling against the national media at large. Are they wining? No. They are frowned on or mocked. (as out of line) Their efforts are diminished en masse by their fellow press piers. It’s a shame. The loudest barking dogs get the attention.

Yet with all that said, media wanted a special day to pat themselves on the back for their biases and efforts. Of course they want to broaden the problem and criticism of the press. And they want all members of it to be forced to defend press’s greater national agenda.

Why is it that Republicans always seem to have an active campaign against press, media? Is it good politics? You could turn that around as well, to “why does press always seem to be actively campaigning against Republicans?” And both would be correct. There are decades of mistrust built up on the Republican side. Best to know who your biggest opponents or critics are if you are a politician. Enemies? You’d be a fool to believe press is actively, overtly on your side or even that you will get “fair” coverage. John McCain would be Exhibit A. He wanted to believe it, which only says something about him.

For today’s defense of press day, cue the choruses of anecdotal stories about humanity, drinking water, local crime investigations, or school board decisions. All important, but they were not really the issue. And great as those stories may be — cite them all day — they still do not deal with a collective issue of bias in the news media.

When the local news reports a crime, it can intentionally not mention the race, religion of immigration status of the alleged criminal. Sometimes it matters, yet is suspiciously omitted. Sure press did report the story, but did they reveal all pertinent facts? So we are talking about the editorial positions and control of media, which more often is the problem. In other words, what we don’t see is withheld, or accounts of the story that don’t mesh with events. Citing good local stories can cover some of that but not the volumes of accounts where bias is a problem. How about when there is an error? They stick it in the reserved corrections section later But don’t mention it. Where is the honesty or integrity, or for that matter responsibility, in that?

No, what really got their collective goats in the press were the unfavorable public opinion polls showing lack of credibility in the press. Thus, reporting the great local stories is not the real issue here. Their need to be instinctively believed is the whole issue. Their mission and goal depends on that. So press is even dishonest in framing what this is all about. But the people have known for some time what it is about, being fed a steady diet of deceptive or biased coverage that lacked the integrity or scrutiny of a real free press. Would the founders be happy with what the national, collective media has turned into?

And if those local stories are really the issue here, then let’s have them. I mean tell them instead of drowning them out and spoon-feeding us national interests — and those controlling political interests — by the mainstream collective media. We don’t call it Mainstream Media for nothing. Another term they despise. Tell them all, unedited.

Columbia Journalism Review makes the press defense with a potpourri of snippets.

Washington Post book critic Carlos Lozada read half a dozen “hagiographies” of the president, finding that “some are born Trump sycophants. Some achieve Trump sycophancy. And some have Trump sycophancy thrust upon them—since he’s a star, they let him do that.”

Is that what you got? Better, is that what you really believe? And what are the stages of press degradation? Do we have to diagram that for you?

IPSOS Polls

Returning to President Trump’s views on the press, almost a third of the American people (29%) agree with the idea that “the news media is the enemy of the American people,” including a plurality of Republicans (48%).

I don’t want to tell them what the trend is.

 
Right Ring | Bullright

Meanwhile Press and Media Whine

I’m going to put up this piece from the news association, not because it deserves to be but because it needs to be called out for what it is. I am mean for picking on the press.

They are calling on all press to use their prestigious space to defend the “free press.”
A few hundred have agreed, like a solidarity thing.

RTDNA calls on members to join campaign defending press freedom

August 13, 2018 | RTDNA [*emphasis mine]

The Radio Television Digital News Association and its Voice of the First Amendment Task Force are calling on our more than 1,200 members and their broadcast and digital news outlets to join the Boston Globe and more than 100 other local newspapers across the country on Aug. 16 in a coordinated editorial response to attacks from the President on the media.

“We urge our members to join the effort on Thursday, Aug. 16 by dedicating airtime, publishing an online editorial or sharing information via social media platforms that speaks to your viewers and listeners about the role we play in preserving the public’s right and need to know, in a government for and by the people,” said Dan Shelley, RTDNA’s executive director.

“The President has ratcheted up his anti-press contempt. Journalists are now the ‘disgusting fake news,’ and according to one presidential tweet, we also ‘cause Wars [sic].’ This rhetoric has contributed to many of the president’s supporters lashing out harshly against members of the White House press corps and other journalists. It must stop before more journalists are hurt or worse,” states Shelley.

Today, RTDNA, its members and the other broadcast and digital journalists it represents stand in solidarity with the dozens of American newspapers that have joined the Boston Globe campaign to publish editorials pushing back against the notion that responsible journalism is “fake news” and that journalists are the “enemy of the American people.”

Please contact RTDNA at pressfreedom@rtdna.org if your station plans to participate. For more information on how to explain the public service your news organization regularly provides, please see this list of resources for rebuilding trust with news consumers and this list of questions to consider as a newsroom.

About the Voice of the First Amendment Task Force
RTDNA formed the Voice of the First Amendment Task Force to defend against threats to the First Amendment and news media access, and to bridge the divide between responsible journalists and those who don’t like, or don’t understand, the news media. People wishing to support RTDNA’s efforts may reach out to the task force by emailing pressfreedom@rtdna.org.

About RTDNA
RTDNA is the world’s largest professional organization devoted exclusively to broadcast and digital journalism. Founded as a grassroots organization in 1946, RTDNA works to protect the rights of electronic journalists throughout the country, promotes ethical standards in the industry, provides members with training and education and honors outstanding work in the profession through the Edward R. Murrow Awards.”

Original source

So it is a campaign defending press freedom. Oh goody, a special day for that.

Instead of what they claim, this is a dedicated day to attack Trump, feel free as if they do not already do so daily. So what is the special occasion about this day? That’s what they have done since Trump won.

But my personal issue with this goes much deeper. First of all, when press refers to the First Amendment, they liberally mean “freedom of press.” However, there are other freedoms in the first amendment. Just that to press, this freedom is the only one they really give a damn about. Secondly, it is offensive that they lay claim to the First Amendment as their own. But that is the only part they want people to care about and keep beating us over the head about.

Yes, I understand the need for a Free Press. It is absurd I have to make that disclaimer.

I will take the opportunity to mention another favorite talking point of theirs — meaning the press in general. The claim is Trump declared war on the first amendment. Again, by first amendment they are referring to press. (misleading to say the least.) Or some even say he declared war on the “free press.” What nonsense. I have never seen another president more media friendly than Trump.

This bothers me why? It is mostly this “war on or against the first amendment” mantra that gets me. As the old line goes: “what we have here is a failure to communicate.” With all that is going on, there is not a war on the press or first amendment. It is a battle within the First Amendment. But it has always been there. There has always been some friction within the 1st Amend. The press is only one of 5 freedoms contained therein: Freedom of religion, speech, press, petition of grievance, and assembly. I see press is only one fifth of that. Technically, you can say press may have some tangential influence in others.

As to the “war” as they call it within the first amendment; it is press declaring war on the people’s freedoms. Press has no ownership of or control over the First Amendment.

Despite how I really feel about this brouhaha over the press, I will give them this honored day…… to make a joke out of themselves, as they have done for over 10 years.

What an idea!

We could have had special “defense of the first amendment days” back in 2009-2010. Remember the Tea Parties? But we did not get “special day” kudos for defending free speech. We got the royal condemnation for it, and viciously attacked. For all of our organizing skill and peaceful efforts, we had the long arm of the IRS attack dogs sicked on us. It was labeled traitorous to the US Constitution in media. Talk about Orwellian.

Did we get a special assist or atta-boy from the media/press for standing up and defending the First Amendment? Just the opposite. We were attacked for “hiding behind the first amendment.” But it was press that was doing the attacking. They declared war on free speech and dissent, from both ends of Pennsylvania Ave. and in press and media.

So what does that tell us, other than the fact that the “press” doesn’t give a damn about the first amendment? It tells us they have chosen sides. And they chose to go to war against the American people, just for standing up for their first amendment rights.

So for this dedicated “defending press day” I offer them a peace sign minus the index finger. Of course they really don’t need me or anyone else to stand up for them, they have the power of the press. And chose to use that power against the American people. What were they “standing up” for back then? Oh, it was for big-government, for the power of the White House, the power in Congress. Remember their stories of outrage that people yelled at Congressmen, especially black members, when the Democrat caucus paraded in front of Tea Parties to fabricate fake news about us. Then press ran that narrative lie into the ground. We were also labeled racists then. Media assisted.

Excuse me for not having any outrage that the press is victimized. Give me a break. Again, press made huge choices long ago and declared war within the first amendment, against the people. You didn’t just stand idly by, you were the enforcers. Even Ben Rhodes admitted the Obama administration had media, press eating out of their hand. Because, at that point, free press sycophants, you were no longer a “free press.”

Is it time for a ‘voice of free speech task force’? — at least I’m being honest.
See what they did there: “Voice of the First Amendment Task Force”?

 

Related Ref:
Boston Globe: “200 newspapers join Globe effort on freedom of the press editorials”

[Globe]- The Globe initiative comes amid the president’s repeated verbal attacks on journalists, calling mainstream press organizations “fake news” and “the enemy of the American people.” Tensions came to a boil in early August when CNN reporter Jim Acosta walked out of a press briefing after White House spokeswoman Sarah Sanders refused to refute Trump’s “enemy of the people” comments.

‘‘We are not the enemy of the people,’’ Marjorie Pritchard, deputy managing editor of the Globe’s opinion page, told the AP last week.

 
Right Ring | Bullright

One for the hopper

The daily roundup of news is at times overwhelming. But at the same time we still don’t hear the news we need to know, or want to hear.

If you are looking for that story you know is out there but can’t find, it is probably no surprise why. If you are looking for the true story on something, well, it can be almost impossible to find. Maybe you have to take snippets from 3 different pieces to cobble together the best iteration of the truth. But it is doubtful you will find it from the main talking heads on the 24/7.

Why do I say that and why does that matter? Simply because we have to think, like we always did, using critical thinking. That was always the case for us — not everyone else.

You’ve seen it before where the things media cares about are not the things the people care about. Media admits that it reports what it wants people to care about. Then they will hide behind the excuse that “this is what people want or care about.” They feed us a daily diet of what they want us to see and care about. I’ve even been told basically that by a TV reporter many years ago. It is the ultimate arrogance. They’ll even tell you to your face when they think a story is not worthy of their coverage, though probably not why.

The paraphrase of this distortion is: ‘if it is on the news, we are the reason because we demand it.’ Take the Stormy Daniels (whatever her real name is) story, we are all so curious and just want, no need, to know. If they put it on we want it.

It is also our fault, or Trump’s, when news errors.

Sure we know they are biased but I do wonder how many people know how intentional it really is? I think it has finally become clear; we got a lesson in that over the last couple years. It is about as intentional as the FBI/DOJ investigation of Trump. They, intelligence, were like Rod Blagojevich saying “I got this golden thing”. That statement alone probably did Rod the most harm. But that’s how intelligentsia played us.(or tried to) This golden thing to them begets the golden-shower story. A hodge-podge of a fictional narrative.

Served up daily, the Sludge Of Our Times is not what is on our menu but what we get. The stories we want covered are albeit ignored. Substituted with the stuff from the bottom of the swamp. And we are supposed to say, “sir, can we have more, please?

If people want to know, the MSM’s job is to make you really work to find out.

Right Ring | Bullright

CNN the victims of record

CNN has a new hobby horse and they are very concerned about it. Over last weekend they received threats and someone threatened to come to the studio and gun them down. Apparently authorities have arrested the person.

Let the lectures begin. Don Lemon and several pundits complained about victimization of media they, CNN particularly, have suffered. All of the fault blamed on Trump of course.

Do I even have to make a disclaimer on how wrong it is to make death threats or assault the media? That should not have to be said. I resent being compelled to say it.

So CNN wraps itself in the Victim label. That part of it disturbs me almost as much as the death threats. But they care nothing about the abuse or damage they have caused.

I look at Trump and see the one giant victim in the room that no one seems very concerned about. That whipping post never gets old. They don’t even care what damage that does to the country or to the US around the world. Nope. But media cannot issue one small disclaimer about that. No lecture on that subject.

Yet I hear what this “threat” environment has done to the media. (over and over) Well, they aren’t exactly blameless in their victimhood.

Right away, one of two examples of media hatred cited was the infamous pro-wrestling video Trump retweeted of him body slamming CNN. (the station not an employee) The other video used to make their case against Trump was his golf ball hitting Hillary as she got on a plane. Clearly these two things were humor not threats.

Remember what they did over the the body slam video? CNN claimed it endorsed violence toward CNN and media. Then they hunted down the creator of the video, attacked his character, and threatened to use their bullhorn on him. All for making a funny video.

On this show, where Don Lemon got emotional just reading the CNN statement, all claimed to have gotten threats and “nasty” comments across social media. April Ryan said she got a ton of nasty comments and some threats, and was keeping a list of them. They suggested Fake News was a dog whistle and also driven by racism. Well, just throw it all in there.

Then it all depends what one considers a “threat” though. CNN threw in a funny video as evidence of what, some threat? And they claim this has never happened before. April Ryan claimed all her harassment and threats started when Trump got elected.

The same network is proudly leading the resistance and opposition to Trump. To think they are not going to get any negative feedback would be ridiculous. But are they lumping all the feedback into harassment and threats? Seems they are. I guess they did not notice the other part of the first amendment, freedom of speech.

Right Ring | Bullright

Google slanting search info

Google’s New Fact-Check Feature Almost Exclusively Targets Conservative Sites

Daily Caller

Google, the most powerful search engine in the world, is now displaying fact checks for conservative publications in its results.
No prominent liberal site receives the same treatment.

And not only is Google’s fact-checking highly partisan — perhaps reflecting the sentiments of its leaders — it is also blatantly wrong, asserting sites made “claims” they demonstrably never made.

When searching for a media outlet that leans right, like The Daily Caller (TheDC), Google gives users details on the sidebar, including what topics the site typically writes about, as well as a section titled “Reviewed Claims.”

Vox, and other left-wing outlets and blogs like Gizmodo, are not given the same fact-check treatment. When searching their names, a “Topics they write about” section appears, but there are no “Reviewed Claims.”
In fact, a review of mainstream outlets, as well as other outlets associated with liberal and conservative audiences, shows that only conservative sites feature the highly misleading, subjective analysis. Several conservative-leaning outlets like TheDC are “vetted,” while equally partisan sites like Vox, ThinkProgress, Slate, The Huffington Post, Daily Kos, Salon, Vice and Mother Jones are spared. [More]

Why is Google made the de facto cop on the beat? We saw the same thing with Obama where friendly Leftist commentary went to the top of the search. Selective targeting is the kind of thing conservatives, or Republicans, have grown accustomed to seeing.

The political marketplace: weaponizing business

Check out this foundation article included which seems a bit misleading – to be kind. It is about the Hannity advertising scheme going on. Let the dis-ingenuousness begin.

You know the routine: libs feign outrage over something in conservative media and turn it into a war on sponsors. Or war against them as the case may be. It is all too common. Even worse is the will of businesses to comply to demands. See full article:

(Marketwatch) – “E-Trade, TripAdvisor and Conagra are among the companies that say they will stop advertising on ‘Hannity’ in the wake of Roy Moore allegations.”

“Stop” being the operative word. Just keep that in mind and decide if that is misleading. Some companies make statements who were not currently advertising anyway. But it makes for good fodder for Media Matters extortionists. See what you notice in it.

Back to the M/O

But even the left’s outrage is disingenuous because the offense is not the real objective, the voice of the person is. Libs don’t want to watch the content regardless of the offense. They want the person or show canceled via their protest causing sponsors to abandon it, thereby hopefully getting it removed. The offending material is only an excuse to attack the show/host. The left has a pattern of these attack campaigns. And none other than Media Matters specializes in attacks on anyone or media that doesn’t cow-tow to their agenda.

It has had some success I won’t bother to list.

So it is all routine to the radical left but claiming it is about this or that issue is very deceptive. It is about silencing opposition, simple as that. We all know it but it is important. If they can only shut up their opposition they can railroad their agenda. Only one thing stands in their way, the 1st amendment — free speech and freedom of press. Actions of leftists don’t support either. Sure, they talk a good game when convenient.

Again, we know that. However, nothing stops them from pushing the envelope of their agenda further and further. As is the case when they go down their extensive ‘targets’ list to silence; or down their list of advertisers to the program.

First of all, when someone advertises, it does not mean they are endorsing all the opinions or content of the program. It is not a political endorsement either. It is, in fact, an advertisement to reach eyeballs or certain people. Their objective is sales or exposure to viewers. Again, it is not an endorsement of content or politics. Consumers know this.

You cannot hold the advertisers responsible for what the show does, and you cannot hold the network responsible for what the advertiser says. The network is not the customer service center for the company. And consumers shouldn’t be calling the company because they don’t like the programming. Each are independent with their own interests.

However, advertisers turn into political fodder when they are manipulated by activists like Media Matters and used in a silencing campaign against their targets. Companies are objects of extortion or intimidation in an effort to politicize, and then weaponize them.

Yes, they can go along willingly, but they can be threatened to go along as well. When they comply, they allow their brand and its recognition to be used for specious political motives. So political activists hijack and freely use brands toward their own political objectives.

Normally the problem or damage comes when companies do not give in to the threats. Then they are smeared just as the original target is. Some businesses take what they think is the “easy route” by complying to the demands. It is like the old mob protection racket, where they promise not to break your windows if you just pay the protection. In this case the payment of protection is dropping your ads from a certain target. So, in effect, they are asking the store owner to go break one of his own windows, with the promise they’ll help with the damage. The store owner then, consciously or not, enters into a cozy alliance with the villain racketeers. As long as you support their agenda with your own business practices, they will not cause you further injury.

Does enslavement enter your mind? What about the concept of private property? Something radicals do not have personally invested in it.

Just think about turning over your brand, or proprietary info, to activists for safekeeping? All the years of building your company and brand mean nothing to these extortionists. They only care about what you do with it, or more like how they can use your brand for their political objectives. The definition of Terrorism is threatening or harming people for political motives. Would you turn your car or house over to someone to use to further their own political agenda? I don’t think so.

Now we conservatives don’t sit around and say I don’t like this media or this person and take note of their sponsors to harass them into pulling their ads. It’s not something we do. We don’t hate watch them to track sponsors. And we know that those sponsors are not endorsing the content or opinions, only advertising to eyeballs or ears.

Fast forward to this latest attempt to weaponize Hannity’s sponsors over an interview he did with Roy Moore. The content was not the issue. The statements of Hannity was not the issue. Shutting Hannity down is the only issue. Another priority is the election in Alabama. (or elections is now a priority to Media Matters) And this plays to both ends, the election and silencing Hannity. In the left’s sponsor shakedown they solicit statements from advertisers to not advertise on the show. Keurig was one such company — whether sucked in naively or not.

Only this time the viewers, conservatives and free speech advocates intervened. They promptly told Keurig it had earned a boycott for their trouble. It wasn’t for Hannity but the principle. Over a few days, Keurig realized they tripped over people’s wrath by complying with the fascist left, Media Matters. A boycott was off to a bang but was criticized by MM as dumb for Sean to do.(it wasn’t him) The CEO then apologized to its employees — not the public — that it did not intend to take sides. Ha, too late. They were now involved and had their company held hostage to the left’s demands. Apologizing to the employees does not help that.

Videos popped up of former customers ejecting their coffee makers. This time was different. They may have been threatened with a boycott by Media Matters’ goons, but now they got an actual protest….anyway. See what you get playing games, trying to appease the left? Then came the oops to employees. A funny thing happened on the way to appeasing the fascists: they realized they will get a protest even if they appease the left, and very possibly a boycott too.

Then Libs didn’t realize we we were 6 weeks from Christmas and this puts their season at some risk. Well, that is the cost of getting into bed with the left. Do they care about your business? Do they care about your bottom line? Do they care about your employees? No, and they don’t care about your name or brand either since they are putting that at risk with their political campaigns. Does that mean anything to them? Not a cent, they are only using, abusing, politicizing, and weaponizing these companies.

By Wednesday, NYT had this piece saying advertisers were walking back tweets.

But by Tuesday, those companies were clarifying — or even deleting — statements they had made on the platform that indicated they had pulled ads from Mr. Hannity’s show because of comments he made about Roy S. Moore, the embattled Republican candidate for Senate in Alabama. Those moves followed a backlash against Keurig that included fans of Mr. Hannity posting videos of themselves destroying the company’s coffee makers.

“It’s pretty unusual to see companies like this handling an issue so poorly,” said Kara Alaimo, an assistant professor of public relations at Hofstra University. She said it was especially surprising to see companies like Realtor.com and Volvo delete widely circulated tweets.

The problem is that in the case of Hannity, he has a following including free speech advocates. In Media Matters’ corner, you have radical political hacks and their trolls attacking anything it disagrees with. An actual product or show has a consumer base, where MM does not — it operates on opposition. So fans and advocates or speech spoke up. I guess MM did not anticipate that. Then advertisers realized they could incur as much wrath from taking a stand against Hannity. (which shouldn’t be a compan’s role) They may have figured it is better to appeal to someone’s loyal base, rather than just oppose it. See the dynamics? Interesting that the left has always operated with free reign, where the default position was usually to side with it. But all you need is that big crack in the wall.

From the company point of view, who would want to be brow beaten into doing something or told by others how to spend their ad dollars? Then who wants their company dragged through the mud of politics? Their business model is the bottom line not politics. To add even more damage, MM hacks have also taken the liberty to start speaking for companies, if they are with them or if they are against them. And they usurp a certain power (liberty) over companies in the process. Then they have the nerve to act or even say they represent the best interests of the businesses. No they don’t. Remember the protection racket?

That stand and attitude should bother anyone in business. The idea that a company you built or run is suddenly turned over to whims of a political agenda should be concerning. That a brand you have a proprietary value in is being toyed with by political activists, is equivalent to squatting on your corporate name. It should be seen as an infringement. I think it is time someone send a cease and desist letter to the Media Matters protestors to stop using their name as part of political campaigns. That might send some chills into the corporate extortionists.

Until that happens, when companies and their ad money stand up on their own, independent of political hijackers and extortionists, they can be sucked into a whole lot of bad karma for appeasement policies. It can be a bigger liability than dealing with the protection racketeers.

My opinion is that when companies participate in these campaigns they become tools, weaponized by organizers, little more. I know some may think they are taking a stand but any short-term gains might not be worth the long-term damage and pain it can cause. Not to mention sort of losing control of your business. The issue is bigger than this though. This is a market model.(I don’t believe in it but it is) When companies are activated like this it has an effect on the economy. It turns them into cheap political interests like every other political organ. But actually they become more; they are radicalized and expended as mere political tools. Why would corporations allow themselves to be reduced to that?

I know some companies still take a stand on their special political issues, but they don’t have to morph into special interests or lobbyists. Using a company that way is careless.

Right Ring | Bullright

Russia’s infowars by media and Left

CNN has put on its thinking cap again, or not, in reporting this about Russia’s agenda.

(CNN)A former National Security Council employee who served in the White House under President Barack Obama has issued a harsh rebuke of Russia President Vladimir Putin, saying his actions during the 2016 election amount to “21st-century information warfare.”

Responding to reports that 126 million Americans saw Russian-linked Facebook content during and after the 2016 presidential campaign, Samantha Vinograd told CNN anchor Chris Cuomo on “New Day” Tuesday that “Putin is engaging in digital psyops, or psychological operations.”

She continued, “He’s using misinformation to try to sow divisions in the United States. His view is, the more divided we are here at home, the weaker we’re going to be.”

Information warfare, really, from the folks who weaponized everything against the people, including information. And they did it with the help of the media. Remember those polls, reports, dirty dossier and accepting results? The more divided the weaker? Digest that.

From the mouths of babs. (Obama babs) Lets review this because some media are super-thick. If the objective was sowing division in the US, then clear the deck media has done a bang up job. It doesn’t need Russia’s interference for that — thank you very much.

It’s a laugh to hear them worried and warning about division. From people who boycotted Trump’s inauguration and emotionally crumbled when Hillary lost. And they haven’t accepted it any better since. But listen to them talk about Putin sowing division in the US, using an Obamafile to do it. It’s laughable. Then media carries their narrative as if they are a credible authority. Talk about psy-ops, that is rich.

I’d also like to remind them that the electorate decides elections, not Facebook ads.

But then who needs Facebook when we have a candidate and DNC to create a dirty dossier, with Russian sources, and then inject it into the bloodstream of media and government?

Rights in question by definition

This is about a wide range of events, not just on the Las Vegas shootings.

I pray for all the victims, families, and all the heroes too. My heart goes out to them.

All these many issues and events are connected with a common theme. It’s pretty simple. Principles and philosophy are keys to the common denominator in all.

 

The phrase has repeatedly been proven so many times that “Democrats don’t trust people with their own money.” That always keeps coming up, and we keep saying it. Of course it doesn’t change though, it’s always the same way in the end. They don’t.

But not only don’t progressives, liberals or whatever, not trust us with our money; they don’t trust us with the 1st amendment, 2nd amendment, 5th or the 9th amendments. The same theme throughout is that you cannot be trusted with those “rights” or the freedoms, even those which are not enumerated and retained by the people.

1st: they don’t trust you with your freedom of religion, speech, or assembly. It doesn’t matter that you are secure in those rights. Either the government or others know better and so you are not capable of using your rights to your best interest. That they should have veto powers over those “rights”. Limited by any means.

2nd: You cannot be trusted with the rights to own arms, that someone needs to oversee and regulate or limit your rights. (first they tried to say your rights don’t even apply but Heller decided that. Now they are up to the less right you have, the better for society)

5th: You cannot be trusted with your own freedom of private property. Kelo decision tried to answer that. Your right stops at government’s need and greed. The Supremes freely and liberally reinterpreted what “public use” means — whatever they want it to, including economic value to the community. Secondly, likewise “just compensation” means what they say it means — for what public use they deem fit — for your property.

Hitler once corrected a reporter on how he was not opposed to ownership of private property, just that property owners should consider themselves agents of the state.

9th Amendment: “The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.” They believe in limiting your enumerated rights and so naturally they are suspicious on your ability to handle any of your rights not enumerated, which they can disparage, regulate or deny. Basically, they reserve their right over your rights. I cannot find their superior, sovereign power.

So is there a running theme here? I think so. But now we see that they just don’t trust us, or people in general, in their freedom. Notice they are very suspicous of our motives or use of our rights. And I’m suspicious of progressives’ sincerity about the Bill of Rights.

And of course by denying or restricting those first ten of the Bill of rights, they also infringe on the 14th amendment of due process and equal protections of the laws.

It becomes clear with any serious thought that the left, who spouts platitudes about rights, just does not trust you — or anyone opposed to their interpretation, thinking, or ideology. Thus, your rights must be subservient to their ideology, agenda and political convenience.

Liberals don’t trust you with your money, rights, freedom, or property, or believe in your ability to protect it. That government’s duty is to control our freedom, not secure it.

Right Ring | Bullright

Liberals’ Narrative of Rage

I could use a 1,000 words on the state of liberaldom and liberal media but it almost defies description in many ways. Yet there is no doubt about what they are doing. That liberaldom, and its apologists, are an institutional danger.

When media has mainstreamed propaganda to this level by well-known people, with so-called journalists, we have entered a new state. That it is yet celebrated is another symptom.

Ana Navarro of CNN said Trump “is unfit to be human.” Talk about dehumanizing. The vice-mayor of Charlottesville only calls him 45 because Trump hasn’t earned the respect or title of president. David Gergen, former presidential adviser, said Trump cannot “deal with racism in the country until he deals with the racism in his own heart.”

Just a few more for amusement. A consensus at CNN was Trump is now the ‘Supremacist In Chief.’ Michael Moore declares any white person who voted for him is a racist.

Welcome to ‘No-Reality TV’ – media.

Media: Agents of Ulterior Agenda

I thought it would be useful for scientific purposes to look at who it is the MSM thinks they’re talking to? Who are their preferred viewers or readers? Who is their focus?

First of all, it would be someone who is able to be influenced. Zoom in on those like a laser. So that means that people can be influenced. If they didn’t think so, then they would be wasting their time. Maybe not all, though those are the ones they are concerned with.

And evidently, media thinks this segment of people are pretty dumb. At least uninformed to the point media’s new, enlightened information can possibly change what they think or believe about something, like Donald Trump. Too dumb and you are of no use to them politically, which is of course all that matters.(politics)

That also aligns with what Obama believed, when he always lectured us about not understanding or comprehending what he was doing and saying. You know, it was the ignorant people who were just too dumb to know what was good for them. But he, the smart guy he was, always knew what was good for us. We heard it for 8 years.

The idea is if people were only as smart as they are, we all would agree with libs. It’s their no-brainer, self-evident truth. If persons still don’t believe in Liberal’s agenda, then they are either dumb or some ignorant form of sub-human beings. And discarded as such.

There are basically only two choices: smart like them or ignorant if you disagree. Media and Obama read from the same script. If you are the dumb unconvinced type, you should be rolled by masses who believe otherwise, with no compassion for your views. Having any compassion for your views would humanize you — they must avoid that at all cost.

The people media are concerned with are those that can be pushed, shoved or corralled into supporting libs’ views, in some way. So media wants to be talking right to them as much as possible. It isn’t worried about the ones who do agree, only those who don’t. (they are a threat) That is why Obama, Pelosi or now media have to demonize them.

 

This made me contemplate what I would be if I was their ideal target? I would be someone who is not locked into any belief. (unless to their liberal views) I would be someone who just is not very familiar with any “real” facts. (*real as liberals term them)

I would be impressionable and could believe something based on my sensitivities — natural or coerced — to other people. I would be someone who could give in to peer pressure or brow-beating. Or, alternatively, I could be someone who gives in easily if faced with some unified front of opposition – or defeated by coercive force.

I might also be someone who believes in the nobility of man’s motives or desires, as generally good. I would be someone who is basically gullible, or enough so that I accept what they tell me as basically correct and have a tendency to agree with simple profound points projected at me.

I would believe in, or accept, a zero sum ‘one way or another’ ideology that tells me I either agree with liberals or stand condemned. I would believe that liberals probably are correct about most of the major issues, the more I learn and study about them.

I might also accept the fact, or learn it, that critical thinking only needs to be applied toward non-liberals. I would also soon learn that there is only one way to look at things, in the end. Other views are invalid or need to be abolished. I might also accept that liberals bestow freedom on us and that, in the end, they should control it as its most intelligent caretakers. Throw in someone with an anti-American bias as a bonus prerequisite.

Incidentally, when I consider this profile, I think how it overlays with someone Russians or Marxists look for. So their ideal targets of opportunity seem to overlap the same types.

More could no doubt be added. But Obama, liberals, and media target the same profiles and people. They just believe it is all a matter of informing us enough with their material — be it news or propaganda — to convert us into a usable, controllable political commodity.

It’s worth noting, too, that this group of liberal orthodoxy and their mindset are the ones orchestrating this self-declared Resistance movement. What is wrong with that picture?

RightRing | Bullright

Media enemy of the State

What happens when the media becomes the enemy of the state? Well, we’re about to find out — if it hasn’t been getting clearer all along. It isn’t pretty.

There is no limit to how far the mainstream media zealots and agenda-driven hacks will go. They aren’t armed with the Freedom of Press but with a vendetta and an active imagination with a radical anti-American agenda. (like their messiah Obama)

Some will say, ‘but it’s good and necessary to have an adversarial press.’ Yes, but we are past that, way over that adversarial stage. We are in a new era of hate – resistance.

You can look at it this way, we now have an Independent Counsel investigation. We also have a press acting as if it were special prosecutors. That’s how they operate, with an assumption that they have all these extra powers, as lieutenants for the resistance.

So, in effect, we have the 2 major investigations in Congress. (plus the minor ones) both of them now coordinating with Mueller in the Special Counsel. Mueller feels he has de facto power, direct and indirect, over both of those bodies. And final word. Trump has O.

Then there is the press who thinks no rules apply to it — as if there are any in the other three. Media plays collaboratively off all three official bodies. They handle the steady leaks and anonymous sources, even creating their own news when needed to fill any gaps.

Gas Ahead photo 100_2273.jpg

Photo image cred

There are now leaks coming from the Special Counsel — which we were told would be super tight-lipped. The media worried at first they would be shut out of the info flow because Mueller does not tolerate leaks. Now he appears to be accommodating media.

It is now a full blown coup on the White House.under a unified front. So it comes from multiple directions. Don’t think we are quite there yet? Look around a little more.

Meathead Media is now covering all the voices calling for Sessions to leave. They have their sites on him. More intel leaks are said to justify him leaving. They say he can’t remain. The same voices and media talking heads are also calling for the impeachment process to begin. Many more than Auntie Maxine are chanting impeachment as if there it were as inevitable as his inauguration. Almost like it was planned.

Whether anyone is leaving yet, at this point, they are out to totally shut down this presidency. Make it so unable to function that he cannot survive. That’s the objective.

It just gets worse all the time, as the left ramps up radicalization of all assets at once. With the media being in the center of all the the activity. The harder you look the worse it is.

Here is what News Busters just reported a day ago. Press risks all for its agenda.

At the forum, CIA Director Mike Pompeo took to the stage slammed The New York Times for putting the life of an officer at risk. “We had a publication, you work for Bret, that published the name of an undercover officer at the Central Intelligence Agency. I find that unconscionable,” he angrily declared to the thunderous applause of the audience.

But get this, they seem more concerned for safety of anonymous sources that provide them information than covert operators. This is serious stuff. They are now endangering our national security and our people on the ground. But then the NYT person who was interviewing Pompeo explained it this way — or tried to.

The Times claimed one of the reasons they published the name was because it had appeared in other articles. [their own] Their second reason was that Donald Trump was the president. “[Redacted] is leading an important new administration initiative against Iran,” they said.

Wow, totally outrageous and vindictive. Saying it is justified because Trump is president… which somehow gives them the right to name the person again, with personal information. This is nothing like Valerie Plame. This is real time intel they are messing playing with. Putting lives at risk, daily. Leaks, leaks and super leaks and no one cares.

What we have here is the CIA Director calling out the press right there live, at a security forum. Oh it might not be a hearing at the Capitol but this is even bigger. Right there on stage and people applauded Pompeo for bringing the heat. They deserve public shaming, not that it will work. Is it war?

This is not press or media, these are subversives acting out like seditious cells. That’s how they feel about Trump being President. Jeopardizing the nation’s security means nothing. Disdain for Trump above everything else. Hate rules, Resistance for resistance sake.

Radicals are lose.

And it seems, more and more every day, that not only are there real inherent conflicts and bias with Mueller’s entire team but that he is clearly out to extract a pound of flesh for Comey’s firing. Will he get it? Mueller went rogue from the start. Deep State. All weapons are out in a full assault. Media is at the center driving it all. Hostile enemies within.

RightRing | Bullright

Nothing new to CNN and blackmail

Back on the day before Trump’s inauguration, CNN’s Jeff Zucker said, basically threatening Trump and his administration, that:

“One of the things I think this administration hasn’t figured out yet is that there’s only one television network that is seen in Beijing, Moscow, Seol, Tokyo, Pyongyang, Baghdad, Tehran, and Damascus – and that’s CNN.

The perception of Donald Trump in capitals around the world is shaped, in many ways, by CNN. Continuing to have an adversarial relationship with [us] that network is a mistake.

Do the translation of that. We hold your perception in our hands, act accordingly.
Our media monopoly = your ‘perception’ demise, should we decide so. From the network with 93% negative coverage of Trump. (that is not adversarial, it’s vendetta journalism)

Forward to today and one objectionable meme to CNN. They hunt down and solicit an apology and he removes content, and then CNN says:

“CNN is not publishing “HanA**holeSolo’s” name because he is a private citizen who has issued an extensive statement of apology, showed his remorse by saying he has taken down all his offending posts, and because he said he is not going to repeat this ugly behavior on social media again. In addition, he said his statement could serve as an example to others not to do the same.”

CNN reserves the right to publish his identity should any of that change.

Andrew the self-anointed speech cop for CNN claims no threat.
Now we are “misinterpreting” their statement. Nah, don’t think so.

Two “Becauses”, one “in addition” and one “reserves right should ANY of that change.” = no threat? (IOW: a veto right to our nondisclosure of your identity and whatever we like.)

Where is his “right” (speech) “reserved”? No, it is now conditional upon CNN’s approval.

Misinterpreted? Lots of “intent” there. Who made them speech judge, juror, executioner?

(But if it were a CNN anonymous source, ignore and reverse all the above.)

Don’t give me an M-e-g-y-n

The wandering little Megyn Kelly got her debut “exclusive” interview with Putin and she coined a new standard: Premiere Failure.

The Horn News

Six months and $20 million later, Kelly debuted her much anticipated news magazine show Saturday Night with Megyn Kelly on June 4th — and critics were not impressed.

“Megyn Kelly off to rough start with NBC show’s premiere,” wrote Newsday, who called Kelly “overwhelmed” by Russian President Vladimir Putin during their one-on-one interview. Their final assessment? “Bottom line: Rough launch for Megyn Kelly, but score one for Vladimir Putin.”

First of all, she is notorious for not living up to her hype. (and by now she is the only one still hyping herself) So the Megyn ‘parade of one’ struck out on getting anything of value from a Putin interview. Or maybe it was really her debut in comedy?

The crazy part is that libs were mad at her for other reasons too. And you know how libs get when they are mad at someone. They are offended that she and NBC gave Putin a platform. “Why?” is all they keep saying. Then not to learn a thing by the exercise. She managed to tick off liberals and those on the right, in the know.

She’s in that sweet spot where everyone is hating her — and she did it without putting makeup on a mocked severed head acting like a jihadi. She really blew it. Can she recover? Well, who cares anyway?

The Premiere Failure of Megyn Kelly, does have sort of a ring to it. Scratch world leaders and dignitaries off her list. Should Kathy Griffin be her next interview? It might register more than a yawn. Besides Griffin, Megyn is the undisputed Queen of Fail for the week.
(they both need therapy — both are extreme publicity hounds)