vector art

MSM No Longer Under her Thumb

"It was hell...pure Bosnian hell, I tell you!"

Trapped in a MSM World She Didn't Create

Is Hillary Clinton lying?

Is the Pope Catholic?

Lest we sound ungracious toward the former first lady, we'll add that Clinton isn't used to an adversarial relationship with the Mainstream Media. She's still trapped in the Mainstream Media world that the MSM created for her and her husband 1992-2000.




It was a world the MSM painted in stark colors: black, for evil Republicans who opposed her and her husband's plans and policies; white, for the noble Clintons and their equally-noble, liberal friends. Rarely did the MSM shine its scrutinizing light on their actions or remarks.

So when Clinton said she came under sniper fire in Bosnia and had to run for her life, she really meant, "I landed and nothing happened, but here's an interesting story for you--that could have happened."

Dangerous snipers awaited HRC in Bosnia

Watch the 53-second video and make up your mind: "Hillary Clinton Under a Cloud: Under Pressure Under Fire" at DBKP.com.

by Mondoreb
Source: Hillary Clinton Under a Cloud: Under Pressure Under Fire


DBKP.com - Bigger, Better!.
Back to DBKP at Blogger Front Page

The internet is abuzz with an ongoing story where a man alleges he and Senator Barack Obama had gay sex and did illegal drugs in 1999. While the MSM is aware of this story, no one in the MSM has touched it with a ten foot pole.

Is this yet another "non-story" where the MSM, as "watchdogs," decide not to report it? Or is the story about the MSM itself, that the MSM is withholding a potentially damaging report about a popular candidate running in the 2008 election for its own convoluted reasons?

While the MSM continues to ignore this story, the internet has taken up the slack, various blogs have reported on Sinclair and his claims of his illicit involvement with Senator Obama.

The video was posted one month ago on Youtube. Entitled "Obama's Limo Sex and Drug Party," the video has been seen by over 290,000 plus viewers. The man in the video, Larry Sinclair, claims he met up with the then state representative, Barack Obama, in 1999 for drugs and for sex two times, once in a limo and the other at a hotel.





A pudgy, scruffy looking guy wearing a brightly colored shirt and a baseball cap, Sinclair claims he made the video and posted it on Youtube "because of an incident involving myself and Senator Barack between November 3rd and November 8th in the Chicago, Illinois area."

He goes on to state that he and Obama met at an upscale lounge in Chicago, Illinois, in November of 1999.

Sinclair claims that "after having a few drinks, "Obama and I left in my limo, we began to drink, Mr. Obama acquired powdered cocaine for my use, crack cocaine for his use. I performed sex on Senator Obama , who at the time was a state representative for the state of Illinois. Mr. Obama knows these allegations to be true. I'm challenging Mr. Obama to come forth, be honest, stop claiming that his drug use is limited to his teenage years."

Sinclair goes on to directly address Obama:

"In 1999 you weren't a teenager. In 1999 you were a state representative for the people of the state of Illinois. In 1999, I performed oral sex on you in the back of my limo as well as in my hotel room in Gurnee, Illinois, two days later. If you challenge this, the authenticity of this allegation, I challenge you to take a polygraph test as I will submit to as well."

Sinclair goes on to claim the allegations are true:

"These allegations are true and need to told to the public. Let the public decide whether Mr. Obama is being forthright and honest."

Sinclair challenged Obama to take a polygraph. The question was, would Sinclair submit to one as well, after all, he's the one making the nasty allegations against Obama.

The blog, Whitehouse.com, made a challenge to Sinclair. For $10,000 bucks, take a polygraph and put the money where your mouth is, (Not where it once was) and $100,000 smackeroos if Sinclair passes the test.

The truth will set you free they say, but the truth plus $100,000 will set you even freer. That's the conclusion our good friend Larry Sinclair has come to after considering the offer we made him yesterday: $10,000 to take a polygraph test over his Barack Obama sex and drugs claims, and $100,000 if he passes it. Source - Whitehouse.com

Sinclair has also filed a Federal suit against Obama and David Axelrod:

Later in the day, Sinclair filed suit against Obama and his campaign guru David Axelrod in Minnesota district court for allegedly attempting to abridge Sinclair's right to free speech, and for waging an intimidation campaign against him. Source - Whitehouse.com

We wondered, is the fact that Larry Sinclair is not the brightest bulb in the bunch, a scruffy, pudgy guy with no credentials, is that why the MSM is turning a blind eye to this story?

What if Sinclair, were, say, someone with an Ivy League background, a six or seven figure income, would this make the MSM sit up and report the story?

We're not sure if they would have reported the story unless, and this is a cynical view of the MSM, Sinclair had made his allegations and had named John McCain or Mike Huckabee as the participants instead of Obama.

We would like to know the truth. It's that simple.

Is Larry Sinclair lying or is he telling the truth? Did he spend time with a candidate for the office of the president of the United States doing coke and letting Larry give him blow jobs?

We don't expect our candidates to be inhumanly perfect but we'd like to know if our guy is into kinky sex and doing drugs before we decide to vote for him. What we shouldn't have to deal with is a press who acts as a watchdog for our interests. This is patronizing and not supposed to be the credo of the MSM.

You report, MSM, then let us decide.

Funny, Larry Sinclair said the same thing in his video.

By LBG
HAT TIP - AWA PUHI
Image - No-Tell Motel
Image - Larry Sinclair

DBKP.com - Bigger, Better!.
Death by 1000 Papercuts Front Page.

More bad news from Afghanistan--for Old Media.
[hat tip: Awa Puhi & Pat]

No matter how the mainstream media tries to dress it up, the news coming out of Iraq these days is mostly of the good variety. Deaths down, more territory secured and more Iraqis lining up behind what they can increasingly see is the strong horse: the United States military.

So what's the big mainstream story? Deaths in Afghanistan are up. Newsroom inhabitants at CNN, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, NBC, the NY Times and other outposts in the once-monolithic liberal news empire can come out from under their beds. It's not that bad. The reason is simple for anyone who studies both the Afghan situation and Congress: ineptitude.

A look behind the statistics from Christian Lowe at the Weekly Standard:

IT'S TRUE THAT INSURGENT violence is on the rise in Afghanistan, with a surging Taliban taking up tactics first used against U.S. forces in Iraq, including suicide bombs, improvised explosive devices, and vehicle-borne IEDs. Afghan civilians and national security forces are being killed in greater numbers this year than any year since the 2001 invasion. According to an Afghan diplomatic source, 700 civilians have been killed so far this year--some in poorly-targeted U.S. bombing raids--but a large proportion of those have been the victims of insurgent attacks.

The other side of the story is quite different, however. Along with the rise in Taliban--and to some extent, al Qaeda violence--has come a sharp increase in the number of insurgents killed by Coalition (mostly American and Australian) troops and Afghan security forces. The Afghan diplomat said about 3,500 Taliban have been killed this year, and several top commanders captured.

The U.S. commanders on the ground in Afghanistan don't see the same situation as big US media outlets.

"In this type of war, when you mass against forces like us . . . without firepower, we're able to destroy them quite easily and we've shown that over the last six to seven months," said Col. Thomas McGrath, the American commander in charge of training Afghan security forces near Kandahar. "They're bringing in cohorts of young men who really don't know any better and it's been a colossal failure for them."

Rats! Another gloomy war storyline shot to hell. What's a reporter to do? When everything you've learned the last 40 years about spinning the news to the liberal viewpoint turns out not to be working, what's to be done?

Besides commiserate with like-minded colleagues around the Perrier cooler?

Years from now, coverage of the two fronts in the War on Terror will be a textbook case of the factors that sped the demise of Big Media. When there are other outlets for people to turn to for news, they can comparison shop. News consumers are increasingly turning away from the Old Media.

The way the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have been covered by Old Media is just one more reason more of them would rather switch.

by Mondoreb



Back to Front Page.