American Glob

Back on August 19th, the Democratic Governors Association said FOX News should come with a disclaimer because their parent company gave one million dollars to the Republican Governors Association.

Based on their criteria I have to wonder if every other news outlet in America should also come with a disclaimer….

Senior executives, on-air personalities, producers, reporters, editors, writers and other self-identifying employees of ABC, CBS and NBC contributed more than $1 million to Democratic candidates and campaign committees in 2008, according to an analysis by The Examiner of data compiled by the Center for Responsive Politics.

The Democratic total of $1,020,816 was given by 1,160 employees of the three major broadcast television networks, with an average contribution of $880.

By contrast, only 193 of the employees contributed to Republican candidates and campaign committees, for a total of $142,863. The average Republican contribution was $744.

Disclosure of the heavily Democratic contributions by influential employees of the three major broadcast networks follows on the heels of controversy last week when it was learned that media baron Rupert Murdoch’s News Corp. contributed $1 million to the Republican Governors Association.

Read more opinion on this story at Memeorandum.

The Democratic Governors Association has its panties in a bunch because Rupert Murdoch’s company News Corp. gave one million dollars to the Republican Governors Association. CNN reports…

With the knowledge that Fox News’ parent company recently cut a $1 million check to the Republican Governors Association, the leader of the Democratic Governors Association is calling on the cable news network to run a “formal disclaimer” when it covers gubernatorial races. “I request that you add a formal disclaimer to your news coverage any time any of your programs cover governors or gubernatorial races between now and Election Day,” DGA executive director Nathan Daschle wrote in the letter to Roger Ailes.

My reaction in two words: SO WHAT?

As I’m sure the Democratic Governors Association is aware, so called “objective journalists” donated more money to Barack Obama than John McCain in the 2008 presidential election by a ratio greater than 10 to 1…

An analysis of federal election records shows that the amount of money journalists contributed so far this election cycle favors Democrats by a 15:1 margin over Republicans, with $225,563 going to Democrats, only $16,298 to Republicans .

235 journalists donated to Democrats, just 20 gave to Republicans — a margin greater than 10:1. An even greater disparity, 20:1, exists between the number of journalists who donated to Barack Obama and John McCain.

Searches for other newsroom categories (reporters, correspondents, news editors, anchors, newspaper editors and publishers) produces 311 donors to Democrats to 30 donors to Republicans, a ratio of just over 10:1. In terms of money, $279,266 went to Dems, $20,709 to Republicans, a 14:1 ratio.

By those standards, maybe the news network truly in need of a disclaimer is every single one except FOX News.

Talk about an inconvenient truth.

Read more at Memeorandum.

That is… If said tape contained evidence that would make a Republican look bad.

Obama, Ayers, and PLO supporters toast Edward Said’s successor, but the press doesn’t think it’s quite as newsworthy as Sarah Palin’s wardrobe.

Let’s try a thought experiment. Say John McCain attended a party at which known racists and terror mongers were in attendance. Say testimonials were given, including a glowing one by McCain for the benefit of the guest of honor … who happened to be a top apologist for terrorists. Say McCain not only gave a speech but stood by, in tacit approval and solidarity, while other racists and terror mongers gave speeches that reeked of hatred for an American ally and rationalizations of terror attacks.

Now let’s say the Los Angeles Times obtained a videotape of the party.

Question: Is there any chance — any chance — the Times would not release the tape and publish front-page story after story about the gory details, with the usual accompanying chorus of sanctimony from the oped commentariat? Is there any chance, if the Times was the least bit reluctant about publishing (remember, we’re pretending here), that the rest of the mainstream media (y’know, the guys who drove Trent Lott out of his leadership position over a birthday-party toast) would not be screaming for the release of the tape?

Do we really have to ask?

So now, let’s leave thought experiments and return to reality: Why is the Los Angeles Times sitting on a videotape of the 2003 farewell bash in Chicago at which Barack Obama lavished praise on the guest of honor, Rashid Khalidi — former mouthpiece for master terrorist Yasser Arafat?

Read it all.

Here’s more unsurprising proof of media collusion in the election of Barack Obama.

Mort Zuckerman, who Gateway Pundit notes is a pretty influential media fixture, admitted on Your World With Neil Cavuto today that he wrote a speech for Obama.

Apparently, Mort no longer likes Obama so Gawker, the eternal Obama defender, has rushed to discredit Mort Zuckerman. Ironically, they revealed an even more damning fact in the process…

He used to date noted liberal skank, Arianna Huffington.

I, for one, am shocked.

Is CNN admitting that they’re part of the liberal media machine that hid Obama’s radical social connections while hyping his non-existent executive experience? Yeah, probably…

He was elected because he is cool, calm and analytical. That’s what we wanted to see after George W. Bush, so we made him president. But now the disaster in the Gulf has made many of us want to see someone else — with plenty of anger, emotion and bravado. We want him to yell at BP. We want him to loudly tell us he’s whipping the cleanup effort into shape.

We can’t tell BP ourselves, so we want him to do it for us.

Fair enough. But that’s not the person we elected.

Please don’t count me in that “we.”

I’m actually looking forward to saying “I told you so.”

I’m looking forward to the same non-partisan objective reporting we’ve seen for tea parties…

Protest organizers said on Wednesday outrage over the Arizona law — which seeks to drive illegal immigrants out of the state bordering Mexico — has galvanized Latinos and would translate into a higher turnout for May Day rallies in more than 70 U.S. cities.

“The marches and demonstrations are going to be far more massive than they otherwise would have been,” said Juan Jose Gutierrez, a Los Angeles rally organizer who runs an immigration assistance company.

The backlash began on Friday after Arizona Governor Jan Brewer signed into law a measure that requires state and local police to determine a person’s immigration status if there is “reasonable suspicion” they are undocumented. Critics say it is unconstitutional and opens the door to racial profiling.

I wonder if riot police will be called in at some point. You know, the way they were called in to control your grandmother and her knitting buddies in Quincy, Illinois yesterday.

Boy, those Tea Party people sure are violent, aren’t they?

After Arizona passed a new immigration law last Friday, riots erupted in the state. The useful idiots at ABC News report that these protests were “mostly peaceful.”

Here’s a video of a photographer being assaulted.

Here’s a video of rioters throwing bottles at police.

And finally, more rocks and bottles thrown by the “mostly peaceful” protesters.

I guess Bill Clinton was right about all that potential violence from Tea Parties.

Can you even BEGIN to imagine how the media would treat the situation in Arizona if even one tea party attendee had behaved in this way?

From Reason.com.

Here’s a video where black tea party attendees speak out and completely destroy the Democrat/Media narrative about racism at Tea Parties.

If you’ve been paying attention, you know the only racial violence at Tea Parties was committed by white SEIU members against black tea party member/town hall attendee, Kenneth Gladney.

I guess it’s not that shocking when you consider the fact that most Americans don’t even know that the KKK was an invention of the Democrats.

Paging Keith Olbermann!

BONUS VIDEO: Andrew Breitbart explains it all on Glenn Beck:

The left has been in full screech mode for over a week now, trying to prove that a Tea Party attendee spit on Rep. Emanuel Cleaver (D, MO) as he walked to the House of Representatives. The video shows a man cupping his hands into a makeshift megaphone as the congressman passes by and the left is just convinced that this is irrefutable evidence that the man spit on the congressman.

Did he actually spit? I doubt it. But let’s talk about spitting and while we’re at it, let’s discuss some other bodily fluids.

I realize I’m a little late to this story but it occurred to me that very few people on both sides of the debate have mentioned a similar yet far more shocking incident. At the Republican National Convention in 2008, a group of leftists calling themselves The RNC Welcoming Committee, was waiting to ambush RNC attendees.

In fact, were it not for diligent law enforcement authorities in Minnesota, these leftist scumbags were prepared to hurl buckets of human urine and feces at RNC attendees, delegates, and congressmen. The photo below was taken after a raid at the RNC Welcoming Committee’s HQ. Among assorted weapons, the buckets of human waste can be seen in the lower left. Click the image to enlarge.

So to all you hyperventilating Dems, Progressives and media types (same difference) I ask, which is worse? A spitting incident which you can’t definitively prove but also can’t stop talking about? Or a very real and verifiable incident that would have had far more disgusting results without the intervention of law enforcement and about which you never reported?

Want to know what I believe, Democrats/Media? I believe there was no outrage from you over this because you would have liked it! Oh, sure if you were pressed to comment in public you’d say the right things, but deep down you would have been snickering to yourselves to see Republicans doused in human filth.

So why don’t you file your spittle outrage stories in the same place you put your non-coverage of the RNC Welcoming Committee.

Wake me up when conservatives get caught red handed by cops with a plan to throw buckets of human waste at you.

Then we’ll talk.

I can’t wait to see Olbermann and the New York Times’ take on this one. After all, if this guy had ever been within 500 miles of a Tea Party, we’d never hear the end of it.

In 2001, in the months that followed 9/11, there was a wave of terrorist attacks which came in the form of Anthrax laced letters being mailed to politicians, news offices and others. The culprit turned out to be Bruce Ivins, a scientist who actually worked for the United States government.

Ivins committed suicide as the FBI closed in on him in July of 2008. New FBI reports have since been released and they paint a pretty weird picture.

Despite being an FBI target, Ivins was often forthcoming about the details of his strange obsessions and private life. For example, as seen below, when agents executed search warrants in late-2007, an FBI supervisor asked Ivins if he was worried about those raids. Ivins said he was, noting that he did things a “middle age man should not do,” adding that his actions would “not be acceptable to most people.” He then noted that agents searching his basement would find a “bag of material that he uses to ‘cross-dress,’” according to an interview report.

Three months before his suicide, surveillance agents sifted through trash Ivins left at his curb and discovered that the beleaguered scientist was disposing of pornographic magazines, fetish titles, and 15 pairs of stained women’s panties.

The FBI records show that some Ivins acquaintances shared with the FBI e-mail and instant message communications exchanged with the scientist. In a July 2008 e-mail, Ivins wrote that “Dick Cheney scares me. The Patriot Act is so unconstitutional it’s not even funny.” He added, “I’m voting for Obama!”

If Ivins was alive today and sitting in a jail cell, I wonder how he’d react to the news that President Obama signed the order to continue the Patriot Act just last weekend.

The Democrats had the numbers to make changes, but another civil war would have ensued.  In addition, it appears that when these controversial legislative pieces are passed by the Democrats, it makes it all better.  No more outrage from the MSM and the far-left, because the rules of war and engagement are clearly different because, you know, the Democrats are in charge.

The MSM won’t say anything about Obama signing the Patriot Act for the same reason they’ll never point out that Bruce Ivins was an Obama supporter. It doesn’t serve their agenda.

Had McCain won in 2008 and signed the Patriot Act last Saturday night, you’d find that information splashed across the front pages of the New York Times, The Boston Globe and on every major network by 6 pm. It would be used as a confirmation that Republicans and Conservatives are evil, Constitution shredding, non-humans. When Obama does it, it must have been the right thing to do, now let’s never discuss it again.

If Bruce Ivins had sent an email to a colleague saying “Hey, how about that Sarah Palin? I like her.” it would surely be newsworthy. But he didn’t say that. He sent a message to a colleague saying he was “voting for Obama!”

That should pretty much guarantee that we’ll never hear anything about it in “the news.”