If you're like me, you've been sitting on the edge of your seat waiting for who pro-abortion and free (at least to her) birth control advocate Sandra Fluke was going to endorse for President this year. My friends, the wait is over.
Fluke's endorsing President Obama.
Whew! Now that we have that taken care of, let's focus on who former American Idol singer Adam Lambert is going to vote for this year!
Really? Was there any doubt Fluke was going to support Obama given how Fluke has connections to the Obama White House? Isn't that like the neighborhood thief endorsing the police chief who turns the other way when there's a rash of thefts in the robber's neighborhood?
But let me take it a step further. Fluke's endorsement of Obama is indicative of how the Left turns a blind eye to women's issues. Sure, Democrats love to talk about the "Republican war on women," but what exactly has Obama done for women since becoming President? I mean, aside from paying his female staffers less? The truth is he's done...nothing substantial. One of his first acts as President was to sign the Lily Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009, which Leftists love to crow about when talking about the Left's commitment to women's rights. Yet, by his own actions, Obama is a fair-weather friend to women.
Remember "Julia," the fictional female cooked up by the Obama reelection team to show how Obama's record on women's issues was superior to the Republicans' record? If you paid close attention, you saw Julia rely on government at every stage of her life. As I pointed out previously, the underlying message is the Left believes women need government at every step because they're not capable of doing it themselves. That, my friends, is pure misogyny, wrapped up in a Obama/Biden campaign package.
Leftists like Ms. Fluke have been conditioned to be just like "Julia": victims that can only succeed through government intervention. And thanks to media outlets like CNN and MSNBC, Fluke can continue to milk her infamy a little while longer. Put another way, the Left keeps using Ms. Fluke and she keeps talking, all the while ignoring or completely missing the irony of her media-driven empowerment being used by the media to strip women of their true power by trying to reduce them to little girls who need a Daddy to help them.
A Daddy like...Barack Obama.
It's no surprise how that works out, is it?
Friday, June 15, 2012
Tuesday, June 12, 2012
The "Death of Investigative Journalism" Is Greatly Exaggerated
With the 40th anniversary of the Watergate story, the media have taken a look back at the state of investigative journalism and they're not happy with what they've found. They're shocked, shocked I tell you, that investigative journalism has gone the way of the 8 track player! Sure, there are a handful of little-known sources they've found, but they're the exception, not the rule. "We need investigative journalism!" they cry from their computer keyboards!
Let me ask you big-time mainstream media advocates of investigative journalism a simple question. Have you looked in the mirror lately? As much as you whine about the lack of investigative journalism, you fail to see the reason for its alleged decline is, well, you. The journalism profession has become little more than a public relations firm working for the Left and any cause it deems vital, no matter how apathetic the public is about it. While media sources spent precious minutes on Mitt Romney's stupid behavior in high school, not even a microsecond was spent doing a serious story about the national security leaks coming out of the Obama White House. Remember the story about Obama bullying a student in school? No? Not surprising because you guys didn't think it was important enough to address. But Mitt Romney? Why, he's fair game!
Fortunately (or unfortunately, depending on your point of view), bloggers are doing what Woodward and Bernstein were doing during Watergate. I know you media types don't consider blogging to be legitimate journalism because of the lack of accountability when a story is factually wrong (by the way, has the New York Times recovered from the Jayson Blair fiasco?). However, the blogosphere is proving you don't need to go to Columbia to point out corruption in the world around us. And given the state of what passes for mainstream journalism these days, the blogger sitting at home in his PJs is out-hustling the big name reporters you rub shoulders with at dinner parties where the topic of the so-called death of investigative journalism is discussed over brie and Chardonnay.
Maybe the reason the media are lamenting the "death" of investigative journalism is because they're afraid to dig into their own side's misdeeds. After all, it's always much more fun to try to take down the high and mighty when you have a personal vendetta, right? Ah, but when you realize your side, the one you've put so much personal stake into, is no better than the side you hate, it's not so fun, is it? There was a time when investigative journalists would put their feelings aside and go after the crooks, letting the chips fall where they may. But when you can't separate the personal from the professional, you're going to play favorites and, in doing so, help to kill investigative journalism through politically blind neglect.
If you really give a damn about investigative journalism, stop playing favorites and start sending out reporters to shine a flashlight into the dark corners of the Left. Sure, you may not get invited to as many dinner parties with those Leftists, but at least you won't get scooped like the National Inquirer did on the John Edwards story.
Let me ask you big-time mainstream media advocates of investigative journalism a simple question. Have you looked in the mirror lately? As much as you whine about the lack of investigative journalism, you fail to see the reason for its alleged decline is, well, you. The journalism profession has become little more than a public relations firm working for the Left and any cause it deems vital, no matter how apathetic the public is about it. While media sources spent precious minutes on Mitt Romney's stupid behavior in high school, not even a microsecond was spent doing a serious story about the national security leaks coming out of the Obama White House. Remember the story about Obama bullying a student in school? No? Not surprising because you guys didn't think it was important enough to address. But Mitt Romney? Why, he's fair game!
Fortunately (or unfortunately, depending on your point of view), bloggers are doing what Woodward and Bernstein were doing during Watergate. I know you media types don't consider blogging to be legitimate journalism because of the lack of accountability when a story is factually wrong (by the way, has the New York Times recovered from the Jayson Blair fiasco?). However, the blogosphere is proving you don't need to go to Columbia to point out corruption in the world around us. And given the state of what passes for mainstream journalism these days, the blogger sitting at home in his PJs is out-hustling the big name reporters you rub shoulders with at dinner parties where the topic of the so-called death of investigative journalism is discussed over brie and Chardonnay.
Maybe the reason the media are lamenting the "death" of investigative journalism is because they're afraid to dig into their own side's misdeeds. After all, it's always much more fun to try to take down the high and mighty when you have a personal vendetta, right? Ah, but when you realize your side, the one you've put so much personal stake into, is no better than the side you hate, it's not so fun, is it? There was a time when investigative journalists would put their feelings aside and go after the crooks, letting the chips fall where they may. But when you can't separate the personal from the professional, you're going to play favorites and, in doing so, help to kill investigative journalism through politically blind neglect.
If you really give a damn about investigative journalism, stop playing favorites and start sending out reporters to shine a flashlight into the dark corners of the Left. Sure, you may not get invited to as many dinner parties with those Leftists, but at least you won't get scooped like the National Inquirer did on the John Edwards story.
Saturday, June 9, 2012
Why Wisconsin Matters
The Wisconsin recall effort is over, and the Left is scrambling to put the best possible spin on their failure to unseat Scott Walker. Naturally, they're pretending the whole thing never happened, but for those of us in the real world, it happened. To my friends on the Left, I offer the following reasons why the Wisconsin recall effort matters on a bigger scale.
The exit polls were wrong...AGAIN! To hear the commentators on MSNBC (including woman-hater Ed Schultz) speak of the recall election, it was going to be tight. And in the end, the only things tight were the throats of the MSNBC folks as they choked back tears and more than a little crow announcing Scott Walker had won. When the media do exit polling, they tend to stay in friendly territory as to support their preconceived narrative. This time, just like in 2000 when the media relied on exit polling and screwed up,the polls were wrong, and so was their coverage.
Union power in political matters is waning. The unions used to be a powerful political force in elections, especially for Democrats. However, as their relevance to actual work has waned, so has their effectiveness in achieving political ends. When the unions starting gunning for Scott Walker last year, they were fired up and ready to storm the Cheesehead Bastille. They faced a problem, though: time. Because of the steps necessary to recall a sitting Governor, the unions had to wait. As time went on, their presence waned to the point only people in Wisconsin knew there was even a recall effort going on. When push came to shove, the union efforts failed. Oh, how the mighty have fallen.
Democrats may cede elections they can't win. Something missing from the recall effort was the presence of Democrat support, especially monetarily. Say what you will about the amount of money Walker raised as compared to his opponent Tom Barrett, but the fact remains the Democratic National Committee didn't see the recall election as that important (even after saying it was very important when Walker's favorability ratings were in the tank). In an effort to try to spin it, Democrats are saying it was just a statewide election with no impact on the larger political battleground. Perhaps the reason they felt that way is because they didn't want to spend money on a losing cause in favor of saving their pennies to try to save their favorite losing cause, Obama/Biden 2012.
This is what democracy looks like? Not so much. The anti-Walker chanters from last year must be scratching their heads at how they could have lost. Either that, or it's the head lice. What they missed out on was the fact democracy isn't standing up, chanting stupid slogans, and making asses of yourselves. To truly enact change, you have to act on it. The recall effort failed in large part because the chanters became a nuisance instead of a sympathetic group willing to take action beyond signing a petition and heckling politicians. On the plus side, though, you had the "pathetic" part down pat. But don't be sad. Soon you'll have a bunch of Astroturf Wall Street folks joining you Lotta-Pa-Losers.
The TEA Party isn't dead. Some of Walker's most strident supporters were members of the TEA Party. They may not have had the media coverage for the sheer body count of the anti-Walker forces, but they made their mark in small ways (such as cleaning up the Capitol after anti-Walker cretins made a mess of the place) and in big ways (like cleaning up the Leftist scum by kicking Barrett to the curb for a second time in two elections). Just because a movement is dormant for a time doesn't mean it's dead. It could be waiting for the next moment to make an impact on the country.
There may be more states in play for Republicans in November. Wisconsin has been a Democrat stronghold for a while, as have many states in the Upper Midwest. This is mainly because of the strong union base in these states. With labor's unimpressive showing in Wisconsin, this may be a turning point for Republicans because union members may not be willing to back the union ticket this time. If other states follow suit, there are a lot of Democrat strongholds that could be toss-ups. Here are a few of them:
Leftists are starting to see Obama's lack of leadership. One of the post-recall comments made by the Left was Obama should have campaigned for Barrett. (Not that it would have helped...) This may be a sign the Left has finally seen Obama as a weak leader that doesn't inspire confidence in his followers. If this trend continues, the Left may not come out to vote, which makes the aforementioned states even more important and could tighten some of the races in other vital states, such as Florida. That doesn't bode well for Obama's reelection chances.
If the Left wants to disregard the results of the Wisconsin recall election, they do so at their own political peril. It's not nearly as insignificant as they think it is.
The exit polls were wrong...AGAIN! To hear the commentators on MSNBC (including woman-hater Ed Schultz) speak of the recall election, it was going to be tight. And in the end, the only things tight were the throats of the MSNBC folks as they choked back tears and more than a little crow announcing Scott Walker had won. When the media do exit polling, they tend to stay in friendly territory as to support their preconceived narrative. This time, just like in 2000 when the media relied on exit polling and screwed up,the polls were wrong, and so was their coverage.
Union power in political matters is waning. The unions used to be a powerful political force in elections, especially for Democrats. However, as their relevance to actual work has waned, so has their effectiveness in achieving political ends. When the unions starting gunning for Scott Walker last year, they were fired up and ready to storm the Cheesehead Bastille. They faced a problem, though: time. Because of the steps necessary to recall a sitting Governor, the unions had to wait. As time went on, their presence waned to the point only people in Wisconsin knew there was even a recall effort going on. When push came to shove, the union efforts failed. Oh, how the mighty have fallen.
Democrats may cede elections they can't win. Something missing from the recall effort was the presence of Democrat support, especially monetarily. Say what you will about the amount of money Walker raised as compared to his opponent Tom Barrett, but the fact remains the Democratic National Committee didn't see the recall election as that important (even after saying it was very important when Walker's favorability ratings were in the tank). In an effort to try to spin it, Democrats are saying it was just a statewide election with no impact on the larger political battleground. Perhaps the reason they felt that way is because they didn't want to spend money on a losing cause in favor of saving their pennies to try to save their favorite losing cause, Obama/Biden 2012.
This is what democracy looks like? Not so much. The anti-Walker chanters from last year must be scratching their heads at how they could have lost. Either that, or it's the head lice. What they missed out on was the fact democracy isn't standing up, chanting stupid slogans, and making asses of yourselves. To truly enact change, you have to act on it. The recall effort failed in large part because the chanters became a nuisance instead of a sympathetic group willing to take action beyond signing a petition and heckling politicians. On the plus side, though, you had the "pathetic" part down pat. But don't be sad. Soon you'll have a bunch of Astroturf Wall Street folks joining you Lotta-Pa-Losers.
The TEA Party isn't dead. Some of Walker's most strident supporters were members of the TEA Party. They may not have had the media coverage for the sheer body count of the anti-Walker forces, but they made their mark in small ways (such as cleaning up the Capitol after anti-Walker cretins made a mess of the place) and in big ways (like cleaning up the Leftist scum by kicking Barrett to the curb for a second time in two elections). Just because a movement is dormant for a time doesn't mean it's dead. It could be waiting for the next moment to make an impact on the country.
There may be more states in play for Republicans in November. Wisconsin has been a Democrat stronghold for a while, as have many states in the Upper Midwest. This is mainly because of the strong union base in these states. With labor's unimpressive showing in Wisconsin, this may be a turning point for Republicans because union members may not be willing to back the union ticket this time. If other states follow suit, there are a lot of Democrat strongholds that could be toss-ups. Here are a few of them:
- Iowa
- Ohio
- Michigan
- Pennsylvania
- West Virginia
- Minnesota
Leftists are starting to see Obama's lack of leadership. One of the post-recall comments made by the Left was Obama should have campaigned for Barrett. (Not that it would have helped...) This may be a sign the Left has finally seen Obama as a weak leader that doesn't inspire confidence in his followers. If this trend continues, the Left may not come out to vote, which makes the aforementioned states even more important and could tighten some of the races in other vital states, such as Florida. That doesn't bode well for Obama's reelection chances.
If the Left wants to disregard the results of the Wisconsin recall election, they do so at their own political peril. It's not nearly as insignificant as they think it is.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)