Showing posts with label media bias. Show all posts
Showing posts with label media bias. Show all posts

Sunday, April 17, 2011

Bob Schieffer and Face the Nation Show Why Conservatives Claim Media Bias

I happened to turn on Face the Nation this morning whilst lazily turning the wheel of my stationary bike in an attempt to look like I was exercising.  There were two guests--one was Congressman Paul Ryan, remoted in from Wisconsin, and the other was Senator Mark Warner, in studio with host Bob Schieffer.  The interviews were conducted serially.

The entire show will be posted here eventually, and when it is, I urge you to watch.  In it, you will be treated to a prima facie case of media bias, the kind that the media never seems to recognize in itself but which drives those of us who shake our heads in disbelief crazy.

Throughout the entire interview with Ryan (who is a cool customer, no doubt), Schieffer rarely uses the acceptable device of using statements of other politicians to raise criticisms of Ryan's plan.  No--Mr. Schieffer spends almost the entire interview voicing his OWN criticisms of Ryan's plan.  Especially galling was his attempt to (using the standard lefty talking points, natch) paint Ryan's tax reform plan as "tax cuts for the rich". Ryan does a good job of keeping his cool in the face of this ridiculosity, pointing time and again to the fact that HIS tax reform plan is the tax reform plan put forward by the President's own deficit reduction commission (Bowles/Simpson).  Yes it lowers rates (for everyone) but it eliminates loopholes and deductions too--leading to the same revenue (and more when the economy grows) and a fairer (by Ryan's estimation) system. Schieffer just can't seem to get his brain around this--to him, it's just cutting taxes for "rich people" (his words).

Cut next to the interview in-studio with Senator Mark Warner of Virginia (Dem).  Warner's a good egg all in all, and he's part of a group of six Senators (three of each) who are leading the charge to have much of the Bowles/Simpson plan codified into law.  Schieffer's entire demeanor is different with Warner.  He's not on the attack.  It's as if Warner's reputation as a "bi-partisan" gets him a pass.

Most scurrilous of all, Schieffer--either poorly briefed, stupid, or simply a partisan lefty hack--tries to get Warner to criticize Ryan's tax (reform) plan.  Warner doesn't do so, but he does take the opportunity to criticize other parts of Ryan's plan (nothing unfair about that).  Then--most astonishing of all--Warner goes on to explain HIS group's tax reform plan--which is virtually identical to the Bowles-Simpson plan--eliciting nary a SNIFF of "tax cuts for the rich" from Schieffer.  But Warner's plan IS Ryan's plan IS Bowles-Simpson--they are all essentially saying the same things--but when Ryan says it, Schieffer sees "tax cuts for rich people."  When Warner says it, Schieffer sees bipartisan work at real reform.

The trouble with soft lefties like Schieffer is that they have truly come to believe that their view IS the middle, or worse, that it is simply the most enlightened. 


Oh--almost forgot this one.  Apparently, Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner was on the talkies this morning, and on two separate shows, he indicated that Republican Leadership had assured the President "behind closed doors" that they would vote to raise the debt ceiling.  When Schieffer confronted Ryan with this, Ryan stated that he had NOT heard that, but that Republican leadership would work with the Administration to put forward a plan that cuts spending and allows an increase in the debt ceiling.  Schieffer was simply incredulous that Ryan didn't know that Republican leaders had made this assurance to the President, and he even got Warner to comment on it.

Did it ever occur to Bob Schieffer that Tim Geithner wasn't telling the truth?  That by publicly commenting on unverifiable statements, the Treasury Secretary might be-oh, posturing a bit, attempting to paint Republicans in a corner, following instructions from the White House?  Schieffer just buys HOOK LINE AND SINKER into what could be a political trick by the Administration--without once even CONSIDERING that this could be the case.  It's a better story for him if Paul Ryan's being left out to dry by Republican leaders.  Doesn't fit the narrative that Geithner could be lying....

Sunday, March 14, 2010

Just Another Instance of the Bought And Paid For Media's Double Standards

Andy McCarthy nails it here. Seems Justice Thomas' wife is starting a Tea Party group and some in the BAPF media believe this somehow might impugn the impartiality of the Supreme Court. Never mind the Al-Qaida lawyers in the Justice Department--just move along.

Wednesday, February 24, 2010

WaPost Endorsements In Virginia

Two races, two Democrats. Nothing to worry about here, move along.

Monday, January 25, 2010

Howard Kurtz Accuses BAPF Media of Missing Brown Story

In a refrain familiar to Conservatives these days, the Bought and Paid For (BAPF) media is reviewing itself to reveal why it is that it missed YET ANOTHER story of rising Conservative/Republican fervor that eventually blew up in the Democratic Party's face. To be fair, Howard Kurtz is a moderate and fair voice, often casting aspersions where they belong--including at his own newspaper. But at some point, even the most biased of defenders of the system are going to have to wonder why this keeps happening.

Thrill Goes Up WaPost Leg

The Washington Post--under the by-line of Anne E. Kornblut and Michael A. Fletcher, deliver unto a waiting and hungry world this morning a hard-hitting and insightful analysis of President Obama's decision making. Ok, well--not really. Instead, what we get is typical BAPF Media (Bought and Paid For) adulation for the intellect and wisdom of our Messiah-cum-President, a man who's steely demeanor and resolve apparently masks a heart of gold. After all, he reads 10 letters a day! From people who are hurting (sniff)! AND HE USES THE INTERWEBS! And he EMAILS! In the comments to the this story on WaPost online, one cheeky reader had the temerity to remind us that Lyndon Johnson was pretty plugged in, too.

Sunday, January 24, 2010

WaPost on VA-5

Last Wednesday night on The Conservative Wahoo Live!, I interviewed Republican candidate for Congress in Virginia's 5th Congressional District, Michael McPadden. McPadden did a good job explaining why he was running, talking about the district and giving us the lay of the land where the election is concerned. Specifically, he discussed the presence of an "establishment" Republican candidate, State Senator Robert Hurt. This article, part of a continuing series of articles in the Washington Post designed to elect Democrats in the Old Dominion--describes the "divided" field on the Republican side of the ledger. The Democrat in the seat now voted for the stimulus, for cap and trade and for health care--stances which are at odds with his constituency.

So what do we get from the Post? We get a column that talks about the division on the right (the immoderate Tea Partiers vs. moderate Mr. Hurt) without EVEN PASSING MENTION OF ANY OF THE REPUBLICAN CANDIDATES! If the Republican side is divide, you'd never know who Hurt was dividing it with.

Tuesday, January 19, 2010

Fred Hiatt, Buttshark

WaPost Editorial Page Editor Fred Hiatt tries hard to convince us that the first year of the Obama Administration was a good thing. Real hard.

Let's review: The prison he was going to close is still open. The wars he was going to end are still going on. The jobs he was going to save or create haven't been saved or created. The stimulus bill he got passed hasn't stimulated anything. His signature issue--healthcare--is now six months past "the deadline" he set and the docs are looking for the paddles. His party is in free-fall, losing elections in Virginia and New Jersey--and now potentially in Massachusetts. His cap and trade bill sits in limbo as House Dems rue the day they extended themselves only to have Senate Dems walk away from it. The Iranians and North Koreans thumb their noses at him even as he writes them nice letters.

But he gives a good speech.

Sunday, January 10, 2010

David Broder, Patron Saint of Idiot Pols

Shortly after the Skivvy Bomber's failed attempt to kill 200 people elicited Janet Napolitano's famous, "the system worked" comment, David Broder penned a glowing hagiography of her in the Post.

This week, Senator Chris Dodd receives Broder's praise as "...a straight shooter."

I loved this line: "Like his friend Ted Kennedy, Dodd enjoyed good whiskey and the company of pretty women, but his uptown tastes never compromised his allegiance to the working stiffs' Democratic Party in which he was raised."

Next up: Broder to defend William Jefferson as an innovative banker.

Monday, November 30, 2009

Climate Change Whitewash Continues.....

The WaPost's Juliet Eilperin spends two dozen paragraphs telling us about the challenges facing those who would wish to enact measures to limit man's contribution to global climate change without a single reference to the scandal raging in the world of climate science as a result of the hacked East Anglia emails.

Update: A friend refers to this as akin to "your dog eating your homework".

Saturday, November 28, 2009

Time Magazine Is Ridiculous

Time Magazine's Cover story this week designates the 00's as the "Decade From Hell", adding to the recurrent social phenomenon of thinking that the times one lives in are somehow "special" and that whatever the issue, it is just more meaningful because those other things--well, they happened to a bunch of dead people. Rubbish.

This really is just another way for the media to bash George Bush, who happened to be president for 80% of this period.

In the article, they qualify their "scope" to post WWII--but I just don't get how the 1970's don't blow the 00's out of the water. Let's review (links provided for Time subscribers):

1. Tail end of Vietnam War
2. A few natural disasters.
3. Richard Nixon
4. Jimmy Carter
5. "Whip Inflation Now"
6. Malaise Speech
7. Iran Hostage Crisis
8. Disco
9. Leisure Suits
10. Gas Lines
11. The Mustang II
12. Jonestown
13. Joyce Carol Oates
14. Munich Olympics
15. Red Brigades
16. Litter

I could go on...and on....and on.

But we now live in the Age of Obama--a man who tells us that this is the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression (wrong) in order to make us feel we're living in notable times. He vexes over his decision in Afghanistan, as if he's the first President to face issues of war and peace.

No, the 2000's weren't particularly bad, but nor were they particularly good. But that doesn't fit the anti-Bush narrative.

Saturday, November 7, 2009

The Decline of Law and Order

For years, Law and Order has been one of the few really great shows out there (along with Top Chef). Anyone else like it?

Or rather, does anyone else STILL like it? This year's season premiered with an episode about torture ordered by the Bush Administration, with Sam Waterston uttering the line 'it's about time someone prosecuted them.' Thanks for your subtlety. MESSAGE: someone needs to go after the last administration.

Last night featured back-to-back episodes. The first one featured a subplot about the police chief suffering through chemo treatments. Her son and husband encourage marijuana use to get through it, and she resists, citing her role as police chief. But she clearly succumbs, as her own superior at the Department takes her aside later and tells her he smells pot on her-and passes her some breath mints and a card with how to discreetly get more pot. MESSAGE: marijuana must be legalized.

The topper, though, was last night's second episode. A woman is killed because she stumbles on to the truth about an expensive drug with few actual benefits but that is a cash cow for big pharma. So big pharma becomes a pinata for all of the actors, with Sam Waterston uttering another gem: 'and this is why we can't get a health care plan passed in this country.' MESSAGE: insurance companies evil and the roadblock to progress.

I don't know how the last episode turned out, because we turned off the TV at the healthcare plan comment, and I sent a note to NBC saying we were done watching this show until they dropped the political agenda. I'm longing for the Fred Thompson/Jerry Ohrbach episodes and wondering why I can't even enjoy a favorite TV show with some sort of point being made.
Older Posts Home