A rant about recent media bias, including a flattering article about Maxine Waters
I woke up this morning to a long article in my morning paper by the AP called "No Holds Barred, Representative Maxine Waters' Remarks Draw Fans." The brilliant Maxine Waters who recently called out Russia for attacking Korea instead of Crimea. Thank goodness she didn't make a serious mistake like misspelling "potato."
Illustration by The Slammer
Recently, we have also been treated to flattering stories in the New Republic, in the Washington Post, and elsewhere on the comedian turned politician Al Franken for his purportedly brilliant opposition to Gorsuch. He is not opposing Gorsuch for any good reason, but that is OK. They are recommending that he run for president for his brilliant questioning. I thought his most intelligent comment was when he said he wasn't a lawyer, but he has been on that committee a long time, and he pays attention. I bet he watched Perry Mason, too. Franken wasn't a very good comedian, either.
Adam Schiff goes on CNN and elsewhere and says there is absolute proof that Trump or his staff colluded with Russia on the election. Of course, he shows no evidence at all because there isn't any. Instead of the media calling for him to resign from the Intelligence Committee for being the partisan hack he is, they act as though he is objective while they call for Nunes to resign for looking at actual evidence. The media and Schiff certainly don't want the public to see that the Obama administration was obviously surveilling and leaking on Trump for quite a while.
I am sure we all recall all the flattering articles on people that opposed Obama's policies, don't we? For example, Ted Cruz had a lot more fans than Maxine, but I am having trouble locating the AP article complimenting him on his fan base. Instead, I believe he was called an obstructionist and a far-right-wing extremist who wanted to shut down the government. I do not believe I have seen the editorials in the NYT, in the WaPo, in the AP, or on the networks where they call Democrats obstructionists and where they say Democrats threaten to shut down all of government and not pay seniors and the poor if they don't get their way on their special interest group Planned Parenthood.
Yesterday morning, USA Today had a headline that Trump's travel ban would cost the U.S. $18.5 billion (around one tenth of 1% of the U.S. economy). It is obviously a made up number. How about an analysis of how much Syrian refuges will spend versus how much they will cost?
We have also been treated to stories about how much North Carolina will lose because the state dared to have a law on the books that respects girls' right to privacy in locker rooms and restrooms.
How about a front-page story in USA Today that Obamacare is costing the government at least $1 trillion more than the original estimate by CBO – and that doesn't include the massive taxes on individuals and businesses and the massive increases in out of pocket expenses for individuals. USA Today won't report that because that doesn't fit in with Democrats' and the media's big-government agenda.
Or how about some front-page stories about the massive costs of the war on fossil fuels? That war especially harms the poor and middle class which the media and other Democrats pretend to care about.
Can anyone imagine all the laughs and reporting by Colbert, Kimmel, Fallon, Conan, The Today Show, The View, and the rest of the media if Ivanka or the Bush twins had tweeted out that they hope the picture of Abe Lincoln wearing a Make America Great Again hat wasn't PhotoShopped? Somehow, I believe that a lot of these people were strangely silent when Chelsea Clinton tweeted that.
The bias and agenda of the media are tremendously easy to spot. It is exactly the same as the Democrats' agenda. It is sad that people in the media like Brokaw, Koppel, and Lauer pretend they are objective.