"Assumptions are sometimes useful, sometimes worthless. Assumptions based on someone's lies should be labeled, 'ABOSL'."
--DBKP's Guide to the Aspiring Writer
We always read the comments to stories here at DBKP. In fact, one of our mantras is, "The comments are part of the story".
Another is, "Sometimes, the comments are better than the story".
One comment alerted us to a story, Is Rush Limbaugh Reille Hunter´s Sugar Daddy?, written by Dee, at Immigration Talk with a Mexican American. Dee is anything if not economical: she shoehorns a lot into her story.
Think of Edwards story. The timeline! He is convinced it is NOT his baby because his last quickie with her was in April. She is not impregnated until late May. His ego does not allow him to consider IVF.
We mention this because it points out a danger that all writers--DBKP included--face; i.e., of basing assumptions on a public figure's lies. The lies are found out and POOF!, there goes all your theories.
In the John Edwards scandal, the biggest two assumptions were made by the Mainstream Media and plague them today as they struggle to explain to their readers why they didn't trust them with information on this story before August 8.
The first: that John Edwards told the truth. The second assumption was that because the National Enquirer reported the information, it couldn't be trusted, not even enough for them to do their own investigations, prior to late July.
As we point out in our soon-to-be published writer's guidelines: Assumptions are sometimes useful, sometimes worthless. Assumptions based on someone's lies should be labeled, 'ABOSL'.
NOW, we're not picking on Dee: we're sure that after you read her story, you'll come to the conclusion that she's got her tongue in her cheek. She seems so pleasant in her comments to DBKP's stories, we're sure of it.
One item did strike us, Dee's quote that, "The odds of a first time pregnancy after 40 are astronomical."
From Older mothers - facts and figures:
Additionally, there is an almost 50% increase from ten years ago in the number of women over forty who are now having babies. The rate for women aged 40 and over increased fastest, by over six per cent from 11.5 per 1,000 women aged 40-44 in 2005, to 12.2 in 2006.
The number of live births in England and Wales to mothers aged 40 plus was 12,103 in 1996 and 23,706 in 2006.
Again, here's more info from the United Kingdom. From
Parenting: Age Of First Time Mothers Shows A Sharp Increase:
The number of women having children in their 30s and 40s has climbed steadily over the last 20 years at a time when the overall birth rate has been dropping, in 2003, the fertility rate for women aged 35-39 and over 40 both increased almost 8%.
Later pregnancies are particularly evident among the wealthier social classes, where women persue a career before embarking on motherhood. The only draw back to later parenting is that as a woman gets older their fertility declines.
We realize that the data's from the U.K., not the USA. And there's precious little data about the pregnancy rates of mistresses over 40, but perhaps this might make a good project for some enterprising blogger.
The poster pictured at the beginning of this story? It's not there exclusively in reference to Dee or the Mainstream Media.
It hangs on the side of a computer at DBKP.
by Mondoreb
image: wsmonty
The InvestigateOSphere vs. The ProtectOSphere
Doug Ross: "Put simply, a tabloid and the blogosphere -- both of which have been ridiculed for years by the MSM -- broke and publicized an immense story regarding a major presidential candidate and potential cabinet member."
Ross presents his evidence and it's damning--for the Mainstream Media.
Exhibit A?
The above chart showing the number of people searching for information on "Rielle Hunter" on Google over the last nine months--because the only place they could get that information was in the pages of the Enquirer [John Edwards Love Child Scandal] and the few sites in the blogosphere who covered it for more than a day or two after the Enquirer printed its December 18 story. [Mickey Kaus at Slate, Doug Ross and DBKP all three covered the story after the initial reaction to the Enquirer story on the blogs.]
Number of times "Rielle Hunter" was mentioned on any MSM newscast--other than a few FoxNews mentions in July and August--or in any MSM newspaper, Time magazine or Newsweek prior to late July: zero.
The National Enquirer first revealed Hunter's name in December. A few blogs, including DBKP and this humble journal, picked up the story because there were a variety of variables that all pointed to the fact that Edwards was a sleazebag.
How the National Enquirer and the Blogosphere Forced John Edwards to Confess
Edwards' Drilling Problems
A comment on Ann Althouse's July 22, "Today is Fitzmas for Mickey Kaus":
David said:
"Do you suppose Edwards went to the hotel to see if he could drill himself out of the problem?
He certainly seems to have drilled himself into it."
by Mondoreb
image: DougRoss@Journal
Pixelaneous #51:
The Many Faces of John Edwards
Edward the Confessor
We present for the reader's edification, these seven pictures. They are taken from the Friday Nightline featuring John Edwards, which many news outlets labeled a "confession".
Did John Edwards confess? Edwards did confess that he was a narcissist*, and a few other things. He said he had asked his family for forgiveness. Edwards said twice that "saying I'm sorry is inadequate"; he never mentioned what words would be adequate.
Now, we'll let the readers decide: was John Edwards contrite?
Seven picture taken from his interview on ABC's Nightline.
* - narcissit: A conceited, self-centered person
MORE PIXELANEOUS: * 50 - Candy Cigarettes: The Most Politically-Incorrect Candy * 49 - Science Fair Projects: Unlikely Winners * 48 - Summer Thunderstorm: Before and After Pictures * 47 - The Crazy World of Egg Stacking * 46 - Meaning of NASCAR Flags * 45 - Big Muskie: The Biggest Machine to Ever Walk the Earth * 44 - Hell's Belles: All-Female AC/DC Tribute Band * 43 - Machine Gun Shoot at Cheyenne Wells, CO! * Pixelaneous #41: Ouch! Some Painful Moments |
ALSO at DBKP:  Click on banner to access over 70 DBKP stories and videos on the John Edwards scandal. |
So, readers, was John Edwards sorry about the affair and cover up? Was he sorry--or was he just angry--he got caught?
Was John Edwards sorry?
by Mondoreb
The New York Times cite the "public's right to know" every time they reveal national security documents that aid and abet terrorists. However, when it comes to the Times' readers and the John Edwards Love Child Scandal, the "public's right to know" be damned.
--R.E. Bierce
The state of the media coverage--or rather, non-coverage--six days after the National Enquirer's reporters catch John Edwards at the Beverly Hilton visiting his mistress and their love child.
Two daily newspapers from the U.K. cover the news the American mainstream media won't. More specifically, the John Edwards Love Child news.
The Independent Sunday edition contained "Love child and mistress claims hit Edwards", while the Times also offered major coverage.
Guy Adams of the Independent has an entertaining account of the affair.
Amid scenes more suited to a Benny Hill sketch than the corridors of a luxury hotel, two journalists and a photographer chased Mr Edwards – whose wife Elizabeth is battling incurable cancer – around the building for several minutes. He eventually went to ground in the men's lavatory for a quarter of an hour, before being escorted from the premises by security staff.
The incident was reported in lurid detail by The Enquirer, and followed up in dozens of America's influential political blogs and news websites, which claimed that Mr Edwards and Ms Hunter were filmed entering the hotel room at 9.30pm.
The country's upmarket newspapers and major broadcasters refused to investigate The National Enquirer's claims. Tony Pierce, the editor of The Los Angeles Times, went so far as to order staff "not to cover the rumours or salacious speculations". Its unofficial blackout appeared to be holding firm until Friday night, when the presenters of Fox's 9pm talk show, Sean Hannity and Alan Colmes, ran a report that confirmed several major details of the Beverly Hilton incident, and asked: "Why were the reporters chasing Edwards, and why is this story nowhere in the mainstream media?"
As mentioned, The Times also carried big coverage of the scandal in yesterday's Sunday edition. We're not nearly as enthusiastic about that story however. The Times' reporter, Sarah Baxter, lifted quotes from DBKP's John Edwards Affair: Interview with David Perel, Editor-in-Chief of the National Enquirer without giving credit to DBKP.
[Nearly 3 days after we alerted the Times to the problem, they still have not acknowledged it. Someone at the Times is aware of the problem, however. Two comments left on the story voicing plagiarism concerns went unpublished, while other comments--submitted later--were. MSM Stealing Blog Content: Times Online Joining Growing MSM Trend?. What we once thought was surely an oversight is now apparently Times' policy.]
Doug Ross, who discovered the problem, has the story: "Sunday Times runs John Edwards-Mistress-Love Child story, rips off blogosphere"
But, as the Soviet government found out, it's hard to control the flow of information in the Digital Age. The lesson remains lost on MSM editors, but it's a lesson that will be taught nonetheless. Media watchers scurry to find a pulse on a MSM that insists on selling a dying product of warmed-over liberal socialism and "all the news we decide you can handle" to the dwindling few who rely on them for "news".
There's no pulse on a corpse.
However, the American media blockade of the story is slowly being penetrated. The Hartford Courant's Kevin Rennie raises a point that MSM editors might consider:
Edwards serpentined around the hotel, before reaching the rooms where both his alleged paramour and baby were staying, according to the Enquirer, which appears to have had a platoon of reporters in strategic spots. Edwards probably thought he would not be noticed when he left at 2:30 in the morning, so he alighted upon the lobby from an elevator. Reporters greeted him when he stepped out.
The former presidential aspirant and vice presidential nominee took refuge in a men's room until hotel security could escort him out and block the five reporters who wanted a few words with him. Edwards later issued a brief statement criticizing the tabloids. He didn't address the love child story, though it was the right time to deny it if it isn't true. Whether it's true or not, his behavior was bizarre for a potential attorney general.
--Kevin Rennie, Hartford Courant: A Star Turn For Elizabeth Edwards
Did Wikipedia join the MSM news blackout of the Edwards affair?
[See: John Edwards Scandal, The Press: Edwards Campaign’s Curious Connections with Rielle Hunter Excite No Mainstream Curiosity and John Edwards Scandal, The Press, The Enquirer and the Blogosphere, among others.]
Apparently so. Newsbusters carries an account: Wikipedia Disallows Any Mention of Alleged John Edwards Scandal.
Wikipedia, which allowed verb tenses for their Tim Russert entry to be changed from present to past tense about a half hour before the official announcement of his death, is suddenly going ultra legal in its refusal to allow their John Edwards entry to be updated with mention of the alleged scandal which was reported in the National Enquirer with many of the details confirmed by Fox News. Suddenly Wikipedia has become a stickler for confirmation detail before the Edwards entry can be updated. To get an idea of how much Wikipedia is twisting itself into a pretzel to justify their refusal to update their John Edwards entry, one needs only to look at their pained, but comedically entertaining, discussions of this matter in their "Tabloid scandal accusations" section:
Gawker also notices, as it continues its yeoman work this time around on the story with "John Edwards' Wikipedia Page Strangely Love Child-Free".
Gawker stepped in with enlightened coverage to supply an Internet searching for news of the affair, the site's Pareene noting that there will always be ways for the creative to disseminate information.
"(Kudos, of course, to the enterprising editor who buried mention of this scandal in this unread entry on a book by Rielle Hunter's ex-boyfriend Jay McInerney.)"
In a curious bit of irony, Newsweek mentioned more about Rielle Hunter's involvement with Edwards in 2006 than after the Enquirer broke the story in October 2007. In an article titled, "John Edwards, Untucked", Johnathan Darman wrote more about Hunter and Edwards than Newsweek's readers have seen since.
In the midst of a short theme sequence that begins each Webisode, the camera lingers over the former senator's behind as he tucks a starched white shirt into his pants. Still, [Rielle] Hunter, now under contract with Edwards's organization, says she sees the untucked John Edwards coming more and more to the fore.
--Jonathan Darman | NEWSWEEK: Politics 2008: John Edwards, Untucked
Newsweek's readers are left to own devices to supply any updates of the "untucked John Edwards" after that Christmas Day 2006 article.
The New York Times continues its formidable non-coverage.
Occasional DBKP contributor, R.E. Bierce writes: "The New York Times cites the "public's right to know" every time they reveal national security documents that aid and abet terrorists. However, when it comes to the John Edwards affair, the "public's right to know" be damned. That information is too sensitive for its readers to handle.
The public's right to know is Times' puffery, to be trotted out whenever its editors feel like giving aid and comfort to an enemy that has already killed over 3000 American on September 11."
Six days on after it's been verified Edwards was at the Beverly Hilton with Rielle Hunter--in the same room--and the MSM is monolithic in its refusal to inform its readership.
Maybe the expected appearance of pictures in this week's edition of the National Enquirer will change their attitudes.
It will be then that their rapidly-disappearing customer base will finally get information that's been available all this time--elsewhere.
by Mondoreb
images: National Enquirer; dbkp file
All Obama, All the Time
by Nancy Morgan
Right Bias
We interrupt this program for a breaking news alert:
"Obama Has Landed Safely Back In The US."
America breathes a collective sigh of relief. Conservatives rejoice also, anticipating a long awaited break from 'All Obama, All The Time.' Alas, it is not to be.
Obama continues to dominate the old media, with 24/7 coverage of his every utterance. Talking heads ruminate endlessly and in depth, on the 'historic' tour just completed by their new president in waiting. With the appropriate oohs and aahs, our old media elites expound on Obama's gravitas, his presidential appearance, his new foreign experience which, coincidentally, Obama states, has confirmed all his preconceptions about Iraq and Afghanistan. How utterly prescient!
Obama, like many on the left, inhabits a world occupied solely with like-minded individuals. Having spent his whole life in the company of socialist and Marxists activists, liberal academics and fellow elites, Obama has made the all too common mistake of believing that his world view is the only one. The correct one. Hence, his surprise was undoubtedly as great as CNN's Christiane Amampour's, when she abjectly reported that she was "surprised by the lack of euphoria" following his 'historic' speech.
Missing from Obama's body of knowledge and experience is any semblance of appreciation for the fully half of Americans who have never inhabited his world. Those pesky conservatives. The right-wing nuts who cling to their guns and Bibles out of a sense of desperation. The idiots who believe global warming is not man-made and the outdated traditionalists who favor free market solutions over government solutions.
You know the type, the ones that are offended that Obama removed the American flag from his campaign plane before jetting off to kow-tow to Europe and condescend to Iraq. The ones that resent the man from nowhere who has the audacity, if not the credentials, to lecture the world on proper behaviour. The ones that dare to question the lies, oops, I mean spin, that issues forth from camp Obama daily.
The latest kerfluffle involves questions about why Obama chose to work out at the Ritz instead of visiting with the troops. Conservatives have the audacity to suggest it was because the military wouldn't allow Obama to bring photographers with him to record his close ties with America's soldiers. You know, the American warriors that are responsible for the very freedoms Obama broadly assigns to the world. No photo op, no visit from on high.
There are even those on the right that dare question the Obama camp's estimate of the reported 200,000 that gathered to hear his Berlin speech. The attendance figures reported by German public television ZDF were 20,000, not the 200,000 figure the Obama camp gave to a complaisant media. Some Americans were even rude enough to question why no American flag was present during Obama's 'historic' Berlin speech.
Adding insult to injury, right-wing bad boy, John Bolton, had the temerity to suggest, "The successes Obama refers to in his speech - the defeat of Nazism, the Berlin airlift and the collapse of communism - were all gained by strong alliances defeating determined opponents of freedom, not by 'one-worlders'."
To top it off, right-wing bloggers actually fact-checked his speech. In a direct assault on Obama's self-anointed right to fashion reality according to his own whim, a London paper found several 'misstatements' (that's liberalspeak for lies) in his historic speech. The audacity!
Ignoring any views that don't conform to his own grandiose view of himself, this 'lightly accomplished one-term senator, a former state legislator from Illinois, a Harvard graduate who has no substantive records of accomplishments' has instructed his aides to start planning his presidential transition.
Nothing in Obama's life has prepared him for the defeat he is bound to suffer come November. All because his pollsters, his advisors and his wife neglected to remind him that all the adulation in the world means squat unless followed up with a vote and, unfortunately, the adoring throngs in Europe can't vote, yet.
Obama has managed to alienate increasing numbers of oh so ordinary Americans who do vote. Like the average American who is more impressed with actions than words. Like the little people who work hard, play by the rules, love God and country and know instinctively that expertise with teleprompters does not a leader make.
The average Joe wants a president who is a citizen of America, not a citizen of the world. They most certainly don't want a president who apologizes for his own country in foreign lands. Even the unsophisticated guy in flyover country knows better than Obama that relying on the old media for accurate information on how Americans think and feel is a fool's game.
Obama will be genuinely surprised when McCain is elected president in November - a presidency that Obama has already claimed as his own. He will undoubtedly question how McCain could have won when Obama doesn't even know a single person who voted for him.
All those meanies on the right have to do is continue to give the Big O more rope.
by Nancy Morgan
Nancy Morgan is a columnist and a news editor for RightBias.com
She lives in South Carolina, where she writes "Culture Watch" weekly.
Article may be reprinted with attribution. Bio available on request.
John Edwards Love Child Story Goes International
No Attribution in TimesOnline Edwards story
Is This a New Business Model for a Mainstream Media in Trouble?
"We contacted an AP senior editor and ombudsman both and both admitted to having had the article passed on to them, and both stated that they viewed us as a blog and because we were a blog, they did not need to credit us."
--Larisa Alexandrovna, Huffington Post & at-Largely
DBKP.com was alerted yesterday to both a good news-bad news situation by Doug Ross, of DougRoss@Journal.
The good news was the TimesOnline had used several of our quotes from our interview this week with David Perel, Editor-in-Chief of the National Enquirer, in a story it ran on John Edwards' run-in with the Enquirer's reporters at the Beverly Hilton while visiting his mistress and their love child.
The bad news was that the Times reporter, Sarah Baxter, in her story, Sleaze scuppers Democrat golden boy never credited DBKP as her source for the quotes, which were taken word-for-word from our story, "John Edwards Affair: Interview with David Perel, Editor-in-Chief of the National Enquirer".
Doug has an account at "Sunday Times runs Edwards-Mistress-Love Child story, rips off Blogosphere".
As Doug points out: "When this story first broke in December I wrote that the blogosphere renders the mainstream media less relevant by the day.
Through its questionable behavior, the Times has done nothing to counter my assertion."
At first, we tended to attribute the non-attribution to an oversight. After all, the story was widely mentioned this week, among other places at Slate, The Corner at National Review Online, Ace of Spades HQ and made the front page of FARK.
But upon closer inspection, doubts began to arise. We sent a letter yesterday to the Times Editor-in-Chief asking that proper credit be given. We also sent a copy to the Times News Desk.
Easy enough, right? Just add the proper credit and link to the corrected story on-line and publish a small correction later for the print edition.
Then we received some disturbing news.
DBKP's LBG sent in an email: I posted a comment on the story at the Times yesterday noting that the reporter did not attribute the Perel quotes to the story written by DBKP. My comment was never published." She included her comment to the Times:
"The reporter who wrote this story did not attribute the original source of the Perel quotes, a story at Death by 1000 Papercuts.com."
I received another email shortly thereafter from Doug Ross with basically the same message.
Though other comments to the story made after both LBG and Doug Ross' had been published, their's were not. So, someone at the Times was aware of their concerns.
This got us wondering if this practice was widespread among the major media; we then started searching the Internet.
Yikes!
At least in America, the MSM is mining blogs for stories and flipping off the original creators/writers when reminded whose work they're using.
The Associated Press commenced suing bloggers quoting AP stories in June 2008. AP's Intellectual Property Governance Coordinator Irene Keselman had this to say in a letter to Cernig, of Newshoggers:
"... you purport that the Drudge Retort's users reproduce and display AP headlines and leads under a fair use defense. Please note that contrary to your assertion, AP considers that the Drudge Retort users' use of AP content does not fall within the parameters of fair use. The use is not fair use simply because the work copied happened to be a news article and that the use is of the headline and the first few sentences only. This is a misunderstanding of the doctrine of "fair use." AP considers taking the headline and lede of a story without a proper license to be an infringement of its copyrights, and additionally constitutes "hot news" misappropriation."
--Fair Use and the Associated Press
The above mentioned dispute involved Drudge Retort using excerpts--some as small as 18 words, according to many reports--under Drudge Retort's own headlines.
AP, thy name is hypocrisy.
Larisa Alexandrovna, Huffington Post and at-Largely wrote about a disturbing experience with AP in "MSM Plagiarism Strikes Again – AP Welcome to the Party"
On March 14, 2006, the AP did their own article, left out any attribution to me or my publication and lifted not only my research but also whole sections of my article for their own (making cosmetic changes of course).
We contacted an AP senior editor and ombudsman both and both admitted to having had the article passed on to them, and both stated that they viewed us as a blog and because we were a blog, they did not need to credit us.
Alexandrovna goes on to state in the same article:
"Unfortunately this is far too common and has happened to me and to other writers and bloggers far too frequently. This time, however, we made a point of tape recording the AP apparatchiks admitting to taking our work and using it without attribution, stating "we do not credit blogs".
She then goes on to list six or seven of the most egregious examples of AP plagiarism at the time of her article, March 27, 2006.
More recently, the New York Times tried to take credit for the Iranian Missile Fauxtography.
The Iranian thugocracy doctored a photo adding in a fourth missile, most likely to cover up a failed one. The blogosphere exposed the manipulated photo. Charles Johnson of Little Green Footballs [Iran's Photoshopped Missile Launch ] was the first to the scene. However, the New York Times blog, The Lede, is taking credit [in a Iranian image, a missile too many] for exposing this even though their report was given much later. FOX, obviously slacking on research, also credits the lede. Mac's mind: Ny Times Commits Plagiarism on Fake Iranian Missile Photos
The above article cited Ace, of Ace of Spades HQ, [Shock: NYT Blog Claims Credit For Fauxtography Story They Didn't Break] who said:
"Whether CJ (Charles Johnson of Little Green Footballs) deserves all the credit, I don’t know. I do know the NYT deserves little of it, and ought to stop claiming otherwise."
Exactly.
The New York Times, forced to eat the bitter fruit from its looney-left editorial policies, may have hit upon the only business model that allows it to survive the death spiral of falling ad revenue, circulation and stock prices: lay off its news reporters and rely on ripping off content from the Blogosphere.
But the AP and NY Times are not alone.
There is so much news theft going on, in fact, that Hamilton Nolan, of Gawker, had to explain "The Golden Rule" in The Complete Guide to Stealing New Stories:
Media outlets can only steal outright from other media outlets that are not their direct competitors, and do not fall in their same class. First-class outlets: National TV news networks (including the big three on cable), the top five national newspapers, top-level weekly news magazines, and a select few websites like Drudge. Second-class outlets: Niche TV networks, local TV news affiliates, smaller metro papers, smaller but still well-respected news magazines, well-known internet news operations that don't fall in the top handful. Third-class outlets: Trade magazines, niche magazines, smaller local papers, niche internet news sites. Fourth-class outlets: Others.
Nolan also includes tips for the aspiring news thief.
All this occurs after many pompous, blow-hard pieces have been written by ex-members of the MSM, now posing as "professors of journalism", about the defects of citizen journalists, and bloggers, in particular.
This was all touched upon in "Citizen Journalism: “911, I’d Like to Report an Unregulated Blogger”. In that piece, David Hazinsky, an ex-NBC-reporter-turned-journalism-prof had railed against the 'dangers of citizen journalism'.
The premise of citizen journalism is that regular people can now collect information and pictures with video cameras and cellphones, and distribute words and images over the Internet. Advocates argue that the acts of collecting and distributing makes these people "journalists." This is like saying someone who carries a scalpel is a "citizen surgeon" or someone who can read a law book is a "citizen lawyer." Tools are merely that. Education, skill and standards are really what make people into trusted professionals. Information without journalistic standards is called gossip.
As we noted then: "One images Hazinsky in the pre-Revolutionary American colonies: he'd be the one beating on John Peter Zenger's printing press with a pitchfork--or shouting down Tom Paine."
So while the MSM dismisses bloggers and other citizen journalists as the great unwashed, it's not above "borrowing" stories from the rubes when it suits them.
As Alexandrovna noted, "What the AP and others are saying essentially is that, while "your work" is good enough for us to steal, you are not credible enough to cite."
"Trusted MSM news professionals" was our nominee for "Oxymoron of the Year".
Although DBKP did not yell, "Stop, thief!" when first alerted to the Times reporter using our work without credit, the more we researched the subject, the more it became apparent that that may have been the proper action to take.
We've been checking our email hopefully; we sincerely hope that an upbeat update will be added to this article.
We're loathe to lump the Times in with the likes of the NY Times and AP. We hope we're contacted--sooner rather than later.
by Mondoreb
NOTE: Ah my! We originally left out one source (see how easy it might be?) but caught it within 10 minutes of this article going up. We marked the quote as a quote--just forgot to include the link. It is now corrected.
Obama's Magical Mystery Tour
After a week of intense media foreplay, Obama has finally embarked on his magical mystery tour. As he boarded the plane that took him on the first leg of his anxiously awaited Middle East and European tour, a pair of uniformed Air Force officers saluted simultaneously, as they do each time President Bush boards Air Force One.
As the media-anointed President in waiting, Obama is virtually guaranteed superstar non-stop media coverage as he makes his taxpayer financed 'fact finding' tour this week. Joining him on this excellent adventure are all three of the major network anchors who will cover his every step, endlessly. The world anxiously awaits.
Obama's visit to Iraq is ostensibly to assess the situation on the ground in order to lend credibility to his already formed opinion of the war in Iraq. In a masterful political move, somewhat akin to inspecting the barn after the horses have already escaped, Barack, with perfect 20/20 hindsight will most likely opine that yes, the surge seemed to have helped matters abit. He will then segueway into his firm, absolutely firm view, which, by the way, he has held for over 4 months, that now is the time to start bringing troops home.
Perky Katy Couric, with the appropriate oohs and aahs, will then proclaim to the world how utterly prescient and, well, presidential Obama is to have suggested the solution to the vexing Iraq problem way before any of the experts did. The only question remaining is how many times perky Katy will flip her hair as she gazes coyly up at Obama through lowered eyelashes.
Having been thus established as an astute visionary and world leader, Obama will leave the battlefield and, safely out of harms way (Thank-God!) will proceed to Europe where a hero's welcome awaits. Foreign newspapers are in a frenzy of Obama adoration, describing our most liberal Senator as "The John Kennedy of our time." In another extremely savvy move, Europe's modern day JFK astutely left Michelle at home, ensuring his sole presence in the spotlight.
Obamamania is sweeping the continent with seventy percent of Italians, 67 percent of Germans, 65 percent of the French and 49 percent of Britons saying they would vote Obama. If only they could vote. Who knows, if Obama gets elected president, maybe someday they will.
The script has been written. Obama is the president of the world, in waiting. If only all Americans realized, like Obama, that priority number one is to get the world to like America again. Europe is yearning to lend America the benefit of their vastly superior expertise in world matters. And Obama is ready and more than willing to point out how America could benefit by adopting a more, well, European world view. After all, aren't we all citizens of the world?
As Obama continues to 'gather facts' and dazzle foreigners with his erudition, charisma and well cut suits, our US media stars will take this rare opportunity to get to know their much admired fellow elites in the foreign media.
Having likely written their news stories before leaving for Iraq, our network anchors will have plenty of time to explore in depth their commonalties with their foreign counterparts. Namely, a deep dislike of America and its system of capitalism and a deep fondness for socialism. America, they will all agree, is the cause of many of the world's woes and let's elect Obama. A good time will be had by all.
All of next week the media will breathlessly, endlessly report on what Obama ate for breakfast, his dynamic repartee with (other?) heads of state, his fondness for French food and, gee, look how the world adores him. Yawn.
Meanwhile, back at home, John McCain will be struggling valiantly to address the issues that affect our country. Stuff like the threat of terrorism, rising gas prices - boring policy talk which, thankfully, won't be reported.
If only the rubes in flyover country, you know, the ones that actually vote, were as sophisticated as the elite media and Obama. Unfortunately, average Americans stopped playing the popularity game once they graduated high-school. Nuance is lost on them, and they have yet to realize that Obama is, as John McCain said, "The One".
Well, things will change this week. The media will make clear that the world wants and needs Obama and the boring details of policy and issues will matter little in the face of such overwhelming approval and mass adoration. From our friends and enemies alike.
It will be made crystal clear that once Obama is president, terrorists will forsake jihad in favor of dialogue, tyrannical thugs will see the error of their ways and world peace will finally have a chance. And best of all - everyone will like us! Then we will all live happily ever after.
by Nancy Morgan
Nancy Morgan is a columnist and news editor for RightBias.com
She lives in South Carolina
Article may be reprinted, with attribution
image: Freaking News
Obamas Excellent Adventure
"John McCain has taken three foreign trips in the past four months, all unaccompanied by a single network anchor."
--Howard Kurtz, Washington Post
If anyone needed any proof that the Mainstream Media is the PR wing of the Democrat Party, they need look no further than Barack Obama's Excellent Adventure. Obama is being attended to by the breathless anchors of ABC, NBC and CBS News.
The three network anchors will travel to Europe and the Middle East next week for Barack Obama's trip, adding their high-wattage spotlight to what is already shaping up as a major media extravaganza.
Lured by an offer of interviews with the Democratic presidential candidate, Brian Williams, Charlie Gibson and Katie Couric will make the overseas trek, meaning that the NBC, ABC and CBS evening newscasts will originate from stops along the route and undoubtedly give it big play....The plan is for Williams, Gibson and Couric interviews to be parceled out on successive nights in different countries, giving each anchor a one-day exclusive.
What about the Republican candidate, John McCain's foreign trips?
Well, McCain--regardless of how hard he tries to win the respect of his buddies in the press corps--doesn't have the "D" after his name, so he gets no anchor coverage on his trips.
"John McCain has taken three foreign trips in the past four months, all unaccompanied by a single network anchor....When McCain visited Britain, France and Israel in March and met with their leaders, no network anchors tagged along. NBC and ABC sent correspondents; CBS did not. None of the evening newscasts covered his trip to Canada last month. And McCain's swing through Colombia and Mexico two weeks ago was barely covered, although NBC and ABC sent correspondents."
--Howard Kurtz, Washington Post
Isn't everyone--except McCain--a winner here?
After all, Obama gets to pretend his trip gives him "foreign policy experience", the Evening News anchors get to pretend that they're covering real news, instead of a campaign-manufactured event, and the Mainstream Media gets to pretend that they're an unbiased news source.
The only losers are those few people who still think that the Mainstream Media serves up news instead of public relations pieces for the Democrat Party.
[For a rant by MSNBC News President Phil Griffin about Fox News, see MSNBC prez on Fox News: "You can't trust a word they say". It's an amusing look into how the Mainstream Media see themselves.]
All of the left-wing components of the Mainstream Media are facing tough times: layoffs, falling stock prices, downsizing. In none of the press releases accompanying these announcements, has there been one mention of the root causes of these gloomy happenings; i.e., the Mainstream Media continues to peddle a product that few are buying these days.
Liberalism and socialism, to be exact.
Again, if any proof is needed, Exhibit A is Obama's Excellent Adventure.
by Mondoreb
image/idea: RidesAPaleHorse
Source:
* Obama's Big Trip
* 3 Anchors to Follow Obama's Trek Abroad
We Won!
When foreign countries start investing billions of dollars in a country, its a safe bet they are aware of the risks involved. And, unlike the old news media and our elected Democrat officials, they see a relatively stable country ripe for investment.
Desperate to ignore any and all evidence of our astounding victory, the left, aided and abetted by the old media, continue to desperately search for any smidgen of bad news from Iraq. Not finding any, new talking points are starting to emerge. Snatching defeat from the jaws of victory, the left has moved its focus off Iraq - to Afghanistan. The war has merely shifted, they say. We haven't won, they claim. For shame.
Even in Afghanistan, the tide is turning. But don't expect to get the straight poop from our elected officials or our very own media. They will continue their 45 year strategy of re-defining reality to their own liking, unaware that the world has changed. The media no longer has a lock on what news Americans hear and Democrats no longer have a lock on defining the issues.
The notion that America is a force for good in the world is not one liberals will ever embrace. Its called cognitive dissonance. And just as they cling to the notion that Alger Hiss was innocent and Che Guevera was a hero, they will continue to believe their own definition of reality, despite any and all evidence to the contrary. To admit they were wrong would invalidate them. And everything is about them.
The reality is that America has accomplished the impossible in Iraq, giving millions of Iraqi people a chance to obtain the very freedoms the old media and liberals so casually pervert. God Bless America.
by Nancy Morgan
Nancy Morgan is a columnist and news editor for RightBias.com
She lives in South Carolina
Article may be reprinted, with attribution
Source: We Won!
images:
* Right Bias
* notionscapital
What We Call News
What we Call the News
The latest offering from the folks at jib jab pokes a little--truthful--fun at the Mainstream Media.
Enjoy!
[video time: 2 min]
Jib Jab's productions are popular because they play no favorites: they make fun of everyone.
by Mondoreb
hat tip: Ernest Hancock, Freedoms Phoenix
We Won!
The rest of the world apparently doesn't read the U.S. Mainstream Media.
Or listen to Congressional Democrats, Harry Reid or Code Pink, either.
Companies from around the world are rushing into Iraq to do business, due to the improved security climate in that country. Over a half-billion dollars worth of investments from countries that, in many cases, didn't support the U.S. in its efforts to improve Iraq's security.
European and Asian companies are beating their American rivals into Iraq now that security has improved the investment climate, Iraq and U.S. officials say.
"It's starting to turn … and the people who are getting in on the ground floor are not American," said Paul Brinkley, the Pentagon official who is leading U.S. efforts to help Iraq rebuild its economy. "It's ironic."
Foreign companies, including U.S. investors, have committed to deals worth about $500 million so far this year and Brinkley expects at least $1 billion in foreign investment by the end of the year.
What about China, who hamstrings the USA in the United Nations every chance it gets?
Even China is reaping profits from the U.S. investment in troops and treasure in Iraq.
USA Today goes on to note that "China has also aggressively pursued the Iraqi market, selling machinery to the government and electronic products to consumers."
Why aren't we celebrating this good news from Iraq?
Or, the questions should more properly be: Why isn't the MSM celebrating the good news from Iraq?
Millions of readers know the answer to that question. Or, rather: Millions of MSM ex-readers.
Apparently, that includes the CEOs of many foreign companies.
by Mondoreb
Sources:
* Foreign firms investing in Iraq
* Right Bias
* si
The Right Color instead of The Right Stuff
The favorite parlor game for liberal, MSM reporters and commentators must be, "Ask Me A Non-Question". Mixing business and pleasure during the spring 2007, they obsessived over the following non-question: "Is Barack Obama black enough?".
By posing non-questions, liberals can give non-answers, which suits them for several reasons. First, it satisfies their regular readers/viewers that they are all thinking. Secondly, it shows they all "care", by just asking. Lastly, they don't have to address real questions: those have much harder solutions.
Asking a non-question to a liberal is like waving the green starting flag at Darlington.
Google the search term, "is obama black enough" and it returns 2.78 million references--overwhelmingly from liberal blogs, newspapers and magazines. It isn't surprising: it was a non-question and any old non-answer was sufficient.
Asking hard, real questions about whether a first-term senator from Illinois had "The Right Stuff", the liberal media was manic about "The Right Color"--or, to be more exact, the right shade of color.
Here's a few representative samples:
As much as his biracial identity has helped Obama build a sizable following in middle America, it's also opened a gap for others to question his authenticity as a black man. In calling Obama the "first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy," the implication was that the black people who are regularly seen by whites — or at least those who aspire to the highest office in the land — are none of these things.
--Is Obama Black Enough?
Time: Feb 1 2007
The Democratic hopeful Barack Obama could become the US's first black president. Yet, with his mixed-race background, Ivy League education and midwestern accent, one of his greatest challenges has been convincing African-Americans that he is 'one of us'.
--Is Barack Obama Black Enough?
The Guardian: Gary Younge, March 1 2007
That was the question 60 Minutes correspondent Steve Kroft posed to Obama in an interview that aired on Sunday. Kroft asked the biracial senator why he considered himself black even though he was raised in a white household. Obama responded by telling Kroft that he never decided to be black: “I think if you look African-American in this society, you’re treated as an African-American.”
--Is Obama Black enough?
Columbia Journalism Review, Sarah Sarmah Feb 15 2007
It was as if American Liberalism had regressed 250 years, to the days of the mulatto, quadroon and octoroon.
The terms mulatto, quadroon, and octoroon originated with the racial policies of European colonizers in the Americas, especially the Spanish. Because civil rights and responsibilities were based directly on the degree of European blood that a person had, such classifications were highly elaborated, and minor distinctions in ancestry were carefully recorded. While these terms have highly precise definitions, in actual practice they were often used based on impressions of skin color rather than definite knowledge of ancestry.Conservatives mostly commented on the media's interest in a non-question. The question itself was absurd, as was the liberal's fascination with it. If Obama held conservative positions on the issues, he could have been a bright blue.
--Ask.com: Octoroon
"Black enough" non-questions are best left to be considered by the liberal Left. Those that practice racial identity politics are better equipped to comment on that which is familiar.
Apparently, liberals decided that Barack Obama was "black enough". The question disappeared and won't be seen again--unless Obama does something to anger a segment of the black population.
In which case, it will be like waving a red flag to a bull--and liberals will get to play their favorite game once again.
by Mondoreb
images:
* blackpeoplearefunny
* media.canada
* destinations360
* pinrepair
DBKP.com - Bigger, Better!.
Back to DBKP at Blogger Front Page
* sheffieldutilities
HUGE Oil Field in Montana is Good News for Consumers
--Which Makes it Unpalatable for the Mainstream Media
While Jeroen van der Veer, Shell’s chief executive, fears for the future of oil supplies after 2015--maybe he's confusing Shell's oil supply with the rest of the world's--Newsmax has just released information on the HUGE oil discovery in Montana: the Williston Basin or "Bakken" field.
About 470 miles outside the state capitol of Helena - in a place called Richland County, Montana - more millionaires are being created per capita than anywhere else in America.
It's the largest domestic oil discovery since Alaska's Prudhoe Bay and has the potential to eliminate all American dependence on foreign oil.
The Energy Information Administration (EIA) estimates it at 503 billion barrels. Even if just 10% of the oil is recoverable... at $107 a barrel, Montana is looking at a resource base worth more than $5.3 trillion.
* "When I first briefed legislators on this, you could practically see their jaws hit the floor. They had no idea." says Terry Johnson, the Montana Legislature's financial analyst.
* "This sizeable find is now the highest-producing onshore oil field found in the past 56 years," reports The Pittsburgh Post Gazette.
It's a formation known as the Williston Basin, but is more commonly referred to as the "Bakken." And it stretches from Northern Montana, through North Dakota and into Canada.
For years, U.S. oil exploration has been considered a dead end. Even the "Big Oil" companies gave up searching for major oil wells decades ago. However, a recent technological breakthrough has opened up the Bakken's massive reserves... and we now have access of up to 500 billion barrels.
And because this is light, sweet oil, those billions of barrels will cost Americans just $16 PER BARREL!
That's enough crude to fully fuel the American economy for 41 years straight.
As one can see from the map below, before the 'Bakken' discovery, the U.S. was still a major oil producer--it is just a major consumer, also.
The relative MSM coverage of the 'Bakken' find is another example of the topsy-turvy media reporting to which the USA--and most of the rest of the world--has grown accustomed.
Politicians, most of who have seldom been involved in anything economically-productive, are looked to as providing answers to complex questions. As Thomas Sowell has said:
Let's face it. Supply and demand will never replace "need" and "greed" in political discussions of economic issues.
Talking about the "need" for more affordable housing or more affordable medical care is what will get politicians more votes this election year.
Voters don't want to hear about impersonal things like supply and demand. They want to hear about how their political heroes will stop the villains from "gouging" them or "exploiting" them with high prices.
Moral melodrama is where it's at, politically.
Moral melodrama, indeed.
Politicians in general--and Democrats, in particular--find little that is "sexy" in talking about supply and demand. How much easier to switch the subject: to "Big Oil Villains".
It has always been thus: politicians TALK about hard questions, hard problems and hard solutions, while their ACTIONS scream "easy". We've come to expect this: their desk plaques might read "Senator" and "Congressman" when you see them on C-SPAN, but for most, a simple "Politician" label would be more accurate.
Careful followers of the economic debates that occupy today's politicians understand this and sigh. But it's seemingly above the heads of most MSM reporters, Bill O'Reilly and Democrat Congressional members.
The 'Bakken' field is economic good news for the U.S.A. and for American consumers.
That's reason enough to provoke little excitement among the Mainstream Media and campaigning politicians.
by Mondoreb
Sources:
* Shell chief fears oil shortage in seven years
* Too "Complex"?: Part II
DBKP.com - Bigger, Better!.
Back to DBKP at Blogger Front Page
Consider This
by 3-wood
Here's something that should drive the MSM up a wall.
Consumer-level inflation's tame in April, U.S. says
"WASHINGTON (MarketWatch) ~
Growth in consumer prices came in below expectations for April even as food prices rose at the sharpest rate in 18 years, a government report showed Wednesday.
The consumer price index rose a moderate 0.2% last month, the Labor Department said.
Excluding volatile food and energy prices, the core consumer price index increased 0.1%.
Inflation was just a bit weaker than expected, but financial markets welcomed the April CPI figures.
Consumer prices are up 3.9% in the past 12 months; core inflation is running at a 2.3% pace."
Analysis
You always want to be careful of numbers compared to "expectations", cause those expectations could have been rational or they could have been dippy. So your really want to look at the hard numbers and see what that tells you. In this case it's good news.
With inflation at 0.2% in April (annualizes to 2.4% at that rate), CPI up 3.9% in the past year including energy and 2.3% without, inflation is still relatively under control. To put this into perspective, China was up 8.5% from April 2007 to April 2008.
This U.S. inflation news is important for the following reason. The Federal Reserve Bank can either try to avoid a recession by keeping rates low (and thus expanding the money supply) to grow the economy or try to avoid inflation by raising rates (thus contracting the money supply) and slowing down the economy. so far the Fed's have chosen the first option. This relatively good inflation news means that the Fed's should be able to keep rates low for the time being and buy some time for the economy to heal and move forward.
Which of course is a good thing for the U.S.
Like I say, that should drive the MSM up a wall.
by 3-wood
[NOTE: The incomparable Babba Zee sent us this post from the Outraged Spleen of Zion. Babba labors without rest, day and night, to expose the nastiness of modern and post-modern fascism, Nazism, Communism, Gramarian Whorism, and various other -ISMs and woes that afflict this Spaceship Earth. Professor 3-wood was kind enough to post this piece on the U.S. economy and the Mainstream Media--which gave Babba a break.]
image: Outraged Spleen of Zion
Source: Consider This: by 3-wood
DBKP.com - Bigger, Better!.
Back to DBKP at Blogger Front Page
