Yup….you guessed it, they are all racist:

That President Obama lost roughly 40 percent of the vote in Democratic primaries in Arkansas, Kentucky and West Virginia over the last two weeks has drawn massive national headlines.

Those headlines have drawn a collective eyeroll from Democrats — and many others who closely follow national politics — who ascribe the underperformance by the incumbent to a very simple thing: racism.

No, none of these Democrats are willing to put their name to that allegation — either generally or for this story. But, it is, without question the prevalent viewpoint they hold privately.

…Former Texas Rep. Charlie Stenholm, a longtime conservative Democrat, acknowledged that “race is definitely a factor for some Texans but not the majority,” adding: “The most significant factor is the perception/reality that the Obama administration has leaned toward the ultra-left viewpoint on almost all issues.”

Oh, so race is a factor for “some” but he has also leaned ultra-left. That couldn’t be the reason could it?

According to the WaPo, it’s not because these states are mostly conservative (including the Democrats in those states) and they don’t like ultra-left candidates. No, it’s just racism.

Tom Cole, a Republican House Member, dismissed the idea of race as a major factor in opposition to Obama out of hand.

Said Cole:

“Obama fares poorly in states like Oklahoma, Kentucky and Arkansas because he has nothing in common with them. They are rural, he is urban. They are populist, he is elitist. And in case anyone hadn’t noticed, they are conservative while he is liberal. That isn’t just true of Republicans in these states. It is true of Democrats as well.”

Get outta here. We all know it’s because they are all a bunch of redneck racist hillbilly’s.

Sigh….

Surprise Is A Near Sighted Porcupine Falling In Love With A Cactus
Cowboy Proverb

I remember hearing my creative writing instructor say, we should write about things we are familiar with and understand. I repeat this advice to myself at least once a week; my old writing instructor’s words have served well as a guide, but they have never been humorous until today.

When You Got Nothin To Lose, Try Anything
Cowboy Proverb

Robin Abcarian was probably excited about the prospect of covering the horsey story of Ann Romney, while trying to gain political traction for the failed presidency of Barack Obama; however, writing an article on a minnow in the shark tank and trying to expose the secrets of life in the shark world is laughable.

Apparently, Ann Romney sold a horse and the horse turned up lame at a later date. Does Robin know how many advanced Dressage Horses turn up lame at some point. I’ll let you in on a little secret, Robin, nearly all of them. Lameness finishes up all the careers of dressage, jumpers, hunters, and three day event horses; it is not a question of “will” or “if”, it is a question of “when”.

It was the end of a long day in a stuffy Simi Valley office building. Ann Romney had been under oath for more than four hours, testifying in a sometimes contentious deposition about a pricey horse she sold that may or may not have been afflicted with a condition that made him unrideable.

In the airless room, Romney was getting annoyed.

“That really is — that really is irritating,” she said when the opposing attorney implied she didn’t know who looked after her horse in Moorpark when she was at her home in Boston. “Of course I know who was looking after my horse. You’re just trying to irritate me.”

Stupidity and overwork on the part of a rider or trainer can lead to premature lameness, but if a horse continues to advance and compete, they will eventually become lame. (Ask any human athlete at the upper levels if he has lameness) There are a few “iron horses” that never display lameness, but they are approximately one in a thousand.

Is Dressage an Elitist Sport? It can be, especially, if you ride in Sullivan Canyon, Beverly Hills, Malibu, Calabasas, Thousand Oaks, Hidden Valley, and Moorpark; however, there are low scale operations in those areas, where the riding is comparatively inexpensive. Although, I must report, some of the Liberals’ biggest and wealthiest donors and fat cats are horse owners who live in these areas and their horse stories of indulgence would make delightful reading material for many Americans. I am sure they would gain far more traction than Ann Romney’s deposition over a horse deal that went south. (Not an uncommon event by the way, but when someone feels like a fool in California, someone else should pay.)

When we speak of spending excessive amounts of money on equine indulgences, comparing the Libs in Sullivan Canyon and Malibu, to Ann Romney in Moorpark, would be like running a race between a freight train and a fat man. The LA Times might call some of the Lib Fat Cats with horses and ask if they mind having their horse indulgences opened up to the internet. Ask if they want the public to know of luxury bathrooms in barns that cost more than most homes in California or if they want to hear of wood from Africa and South America being used to build stalls for their horses. Luxury digs for horses within twenty or thirty miles of people living in the drug infested squalor of the ghettos of LA. The same ghetto dwellers for whom they pretend to care for so self-righteously.

Do Not Tamper With The Natural Ignorance Of A Greenhorn
Cowboy Proverb

Ann Romney says she loves her horses and I believe her; although, I have never worked for her and I don’t know her, but I recognize her compassion for animals, for people like her, people with genuine or real compassion for horses, generally have the same compassion for humans.

Many horse owners have no compassion for horses when they can no longer perform, they become more like inanimate objects; to be frank, they become disposable, they become devoid of value when they no longer allow the limelight to shine upon the rider. They are discarded with extreme indifference, for they have served their purpose. This is the real story, a story of cold callous cruelty, especially, among those who wear false compassion on their sleeve.

“It’s like children,” Romney, a mother of five, testified about Super Hit, the horse at the center of the lawsuit. “You don’t … say one is better than the other, but I loved him.”

Ann Romney spends her own money on her horses, she feels they are therapeutic and for those of you who have read my articles on horses, you probably know, I agree with her.

Romney, who rode horses as a girl, began riding seriously as an adult after being diagnosed with multiple sclerosis in 1998. “I was losing most of the function of my right side,” she testified at her deposition on June 3, 2010. “And I decided I needed to go back and do what I loved before I couldn’t do it anymore.”

She soon fell in love with dressage, a fussy Olympic sport that is also called “horse ballet.” In dressage, a horse moves in delicate, dance-like steps to music as the rider, formally clad in top hat and tails, imperceptibly guides the animal.

Because it requires tremendous muscle control, dressage also provided Romney unexpected therapeutic benefits.

“Riding exhilarated me; it gave me a joy and a purpose,” Romney told the Chronicle of the Horse magazine in 2008. “When I was so fatigued that I couldn’t move, the excitement of going to the barn and getting my foot in the stirrup would make me crawl out of bed.”

So now, we know why Romney is not suited for the presidency. His wife sold a horse that became lame and during a deposition she became annoyed with a lawyer or maybe it is because she has a healthy hobby, a hobby she pays for with her own money, instead of flying around on vacations at taxpayer’s expense with an entourage. Oh excuse me, Michelle’s vacations are to promote good will around the world and show poor people how the Obamas can spend money on indulgences like separate jets to vacation hot spots, now there is an indulgence.

I would rather write about more significant political ideas, but if the LA Times wants to continue trying to smear Ann Romney over senseless and inane horse trivia, they might be surprised at the some of the secrets of the elite equestrian world.

Barack Obama has released a new ad in which Bain Capital, the private equity firm where Mitt Romney worked, is called a “vampire.”

President Obama’s campaign is out with a tough new ad, “Steel,” attacking former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney’s record on job creation.

The two-minute ad focuses on GS Technologies, a steel mill in Kansas City, Mo., that was bought by Romney’s private equity firm Bain Capital and went bankrupt soon after.

The ad paints Romney as out of touch with the needs of the local workers and concerned only with Bain’s own profits.

“We view Mitt Romney as a job destroyer,” says one former mill worker in the ad. Another calls Bain “a vampire. They came in and sucked the life out of us.”

Bain, along with two partners, bought the steel firm in 1993. The author of the WaPo article, Rachel Weiner, makes crystal clear that she is simply another campaign worker in the tank for Obama. Her words:

The two-minute ad focuses on GS Technologies, a steel mill in Kansas City, Mo., that was bought by Romney’s private equity firm Bain Capital and went bankrupt soon after.

and then

Bain bought GST in 1993. According to a January profile of the takeover by Reuters, less than a decade later, the plant closed,

A “decade later” is “soon after”? Seriously?

So what ever became of this steel firm? This:

In 1993, Bain and two partners (GE Capital and Leggett & Platt) took over a century-old Kansas City steel plant known as GSI that badly needed investment capital for modernization. The Bain-led group pumped $100 million of investment capital into the plant, merged the plant with the company’s Georgetown plant within two years, and raised an additional $250 million through two bond offerings. Bain was paid roughly $900,000 in management fees during the Romney period (1993 thru 1999), and its investors ultimately yielded an estimated $50 million on an investment of $24.5 million. In the late 1990s, union relations deteriorated, steel prices nosedived, and raw materials and energy prices ballooned. The company filed for bankruptcy reorganization in 2001. The Georgetown plant was sold and temporarily shutdown, and then reopened over a four year period. Hundreds of Georgetown employees lost their jobs during the temporary shutdown. Georgetown locals blame the temporary shutdown on the owner that followed Bain, and most had no knowledge of Romney’s involvement in the company until the candidates started making their allegations. The plant is now owned by the world’s largest steelmaker and operates two shifts daily. Bain defends its actions at GSI, claiming that it generated substantial investment capital for the company and committed “many thousands of hours to upgrade its facilities and make the company more competitive.”

Now let’s turn to the irony portion of our program. While attacking Mitt Romney’s background in private equity Barack Obama held a fundraiser hosted by a private equity firm:

President Obama is attending a fundraiser today in New York City that will be hosted by Hamilton E. James, the chief operating officer and president of Blackstone. The financial firm Blackstone is “one of the world’s largest private equity fund businesses,” according to its website.

But ironically, Obama today is using Mitt Romney’s background in private equity as the basis of an attack on his Republican rival.

But that’s not the best part. No, THIS is the best part. While Romney wasn’t at Bain when the steel firm went bankrupt, one of Obama’s top bundlers was at Bain:

As Katrina reports, Mitt Romney left Bain Capital in 1999 to manage the Winter Olympics, two years before GST Steel declared bankruptcy. But that hasn’t stopped President Obama from blaming him for the company’s 2001 collapse. In a new Obama campaign video, ex-steel workers criticize Romney for being “out of touch” with the “average working person.” Left unmentioned (and blameless) is Jonathan Lavine.

Lavine, according to the Los Angeles Times, is a top Obama bundler and a managing director at Bain Capital. Lavine, who has raised over $100,000 for the president, was at the firm when GST Steel declared bankruptcy. So according to the Obama team’s logic, Romney, who had left Bain, is responsible for GST Steel’s demise, but Lavine, who was there, is not? Expect to hear more about this connection.

Moreover, Obama’s bailout of the auto industry resulted in the loss of at least 50,000 jobs.

Bill Clinton is right. Obama IS an amateur.

Do you recall a time, a few years back, when the media wouldn’t shut up about a supposed outing of an agent? Yup, the left and the media were pissed.

I bet you could just imagine the firestorm of coverage that would result if instead of a former Secretary of State leaking a name it was our President….right?

Guess not:

Just a week ago the establishment media was aflutter with news that a CIA double-agent had thwarted a new type of underwear bomb attack targeting U.S. flights in a plot devised by al-Qaeda of the Arabian Peninsula.

But as the week progressed, a developing bombshell story got buried under President Obama’s gay marriage announcement. Not only is the supposed CIA asset not a CIA asset at all, but the entire operation was exposed prematurely and the double-agent’s life was immediately threatened by an intelligence leak that very well may have come out of the White House for political gain.

As the story broke, the establishment media was more than happy to attribute the intelligence coup to the CIA and the Obama administration, describing the mole as a “CIA informant.”

It turns out that wasn’t true. The double-agent hadn’t been recruited and placed by the CIA, but by British intelligence, who also managed the operation. In fact, the Americans had only recently been made aware of the joint British-Saudi effort.

The leaks about the operation from the American side have infuriated British intelligence officials, who had hoped to continue the operation. The leaks not only scuttled the mission but put the life of the asset in jeopardy. Even CIA officials, joining their MI5 and MI6 counterparts, were describing the leaks as “despicable,” attributing them to the Obama administration.

As the stillborn investigation into the leaks continues (stillborn, because if the leaks are in fact traced to the White House, there will be no repercussions), the zeal with which the establishment media trumpeted the supposed CIA coup won’t likely be surpassed by the more important story of how the Obama administration attempted to score political points at the expense of one of the most important intelligence operations since 9/11.

Wait, for “political gain?”

Wasn’t the left and the media very upset that non-spy Valerie Plame’s name was uttered by Richard Armitage for “political gain?”

Weren’t there hearings and trials and all that? Or was I just imagining that?

And here we had a Yemeni deep cover agent that we may get once in a generation:

One US official has noted that “this operation could have gone on for some time … when it was cut off by a leak”. Even once the agent turned up in Saudi Arabia, it was clear that his intelligence was helping to target a spate of crucial drone strikes within Yemen – including one that killed AQAP’s head of external operations, a man responsible for the bombing of the USS Cole in 2000.

If the group learnt of their member’s defection from the media, who knows what countermeasures they took? How did that stymie further arrests or airstrikes? AQAP’s chief bomb-maker, Ibrahim Al-Asiri, might even have escaped as a result.

After all, the agent was reportedly evacuated from Yemen two weeks before the appointed date for his attack. He might have remained quietly operational for that entire period, contacting his colleagues and passing on their location. This leak appears to have frustrated a painstaking and risky operation, of the sort that cannot come around very often.

But the Obama administration deliberately scuttled that huge undercover operation, and put the life of a British agent in jeopardy to boot. For what? To boost his re-election hopes. This wasn’t some non-spy desk jockey at the CIA. This was someone who had infiltrated al-Qaeda for god’s sake!

But the MSM and the left are ignoring it.

At least one Democrat lawmaker isn’t

Senator Diane Fienstein:

“AQAP is the number-one threat to our country. … The leak really did endanger sources and methods, and the leak, I think, really has to be prosecuted.”

Congressman Peter King:

“This was more secret than any operation I’m familiar with — even more classified than bin Laden. … That’s why I’m saying the FBI should do a full and complete investigation, because this really is criminal in the literal sense of the word to leak out this type of sensitive, classified information on really almost unparalleled penetration of the enemy.”

Congressman Mike Rogers:

“This has been a damaging leak. We shouldn’t underestimate what really happened here. When you jeopardize our foreign-service liaison partners, any of them that may or may not have been involved, or you jeopardize the conclusion of wrapping up all of the people involved, that’s dangerous to our national security.”

Paging Patrick Fitzgerald….paging Patrick Fitzgerald

Exit thought….ya think they will make a movie about this?

He was injured- just as he said he was.

A medical report compiled by the family physician of accused Trayvon Martin murderer George Zimmerman and obtained exclusively by ABC News found that Zimmerman was diagnosed with a “closed fracture” of his nose, a pair of black eyes, two lacerations to the back of his head and a minor back injury the day after he fatally shot Martin during an alleged altercation.

Zimmerman faces a second degree murder charge for the Feb. 26 shooting that left the unarmed 17-year-old high school junior dead. Zimmerman has claimed self defense in what he described as a life and death struggle that Martin initiated by accosting him, punching him in the face, then repeatedly bashing his head into the pavement.

Also today, a trove of documents are being examined by lawyers for both the defense and prosecution as part of discovery in Zimmerman’s trial — including 67 CDs worth of documents, video of Martin on the night of the shooting, his autopsy report and videos of Zimmerman’s questioning by police.

Zimmerman’s three-page medical report is included in those documents that the defense could use as evidence.

And it also turns out that, contrary to the “Official Report of the Funeral Director”, Trayvon Martin had bloody knuckles- as one might suffer when punching someone else in the face.

WFTV has confirmed that autopsy results show 17-year-old Trayvon Martin had injuries to his knuckles when he died.

The information could support George Zimmerman’s claim that Martin beat him up before Zimmerman shot and killed him.

The autopsy results come as Zimmerman’s attorney, Mark O’Mara continues to go over other evidence in the case.

O’Mara wouldn’t comment on the autopsy evidence, but WFTV legal analyst Bill Sheaffer said it’s better for the defense than it is for the prosecution.

WFTV has learned that the medical examiner found two injuries on Martin’s body: The fatal gunshot wound and broken skin on his knuckles.

When you compare Trayvon’s non-fatal injury with Zimmerman’s bloody head wounds, the autopsy evidence is better for the defense, Sheaffer said.

“It goes along with Zimmerman’s story that he acted in self-defense, because he was getting beaten up by Trayvon Martin,” Sheaffer said.

The injury to Martin’s knuckle also fits with Zimmerman’s story that before he shot and killed Martin, Martin had broken his nose and knocked him to the ground, slamming his head on the sidewalk.

It continues to fall into place for Zimmerman. The big problem for him is that this execrable, disgusting, racist administration is likely to hunt Zimmerman down for eternity until they find him guilty of something- even if it turns out to be littering.

WFTV has learned charges against George Zimmerman could be getting more serious.

State prosecutors said Zimmerman, a neighborhood watchman, profiled and stalked 17-year-old Trayvon Martin before killing him, so the FBI is now looking into charging him with a hate crime.

Zimmerman admitted to killing Martin in February during a confrontation. However, he claims the shooting was in self-defense. He’s facing a second-degree murder charge, which carries a maximum possible sentence of life in prison without the possibility of parole. But if Zimmerman is charged and found guilty of a federal hate crime involving murder, he could face the death penalty.

Eric Holder is very sensitive about anyone who offends “my people” and could give a damn about anyone else. There is NOTHING to indicate George Zimmerman profiled Trayon Martin simply because of his race. In fact, there is potent evidence to the contrary:

Though civil rights demonstrators have argued Zimmerman should not have prejudged Martin, one black neighbor of the Zimmermans said recent history should be taken into account.

“Let’s talk about the elephant in the room. I’m black, OK?” the woman said, declining to be identified because she anticipated backlash due to her race. She leaned in to look a reporter directly in the eyes. “There were black boys robbing houses in this neighborhood,” she said. “That’s why George was suspicious of Trayvon Martin.”

None of that will matter to this cretinous Attorney General or his equally miserable boss. George Zimmerman is more black than Elizabeth Warren is Cherokee. But since the left wing media has Zimmerman characterized as a cracker, that will be his fate and Shylock Holder will seek his pound of flesh.

Rarely has this country has so badly needed a change in leadership. And you are still a blithering idiot to believe anything Barack Obama says. An absolute moron.

The term “disinformation” is derived from the old Soviet Union:

Disinformation is mostly commonly described as false information created by governments in wartime for military purposes and by totalitarian governments for political purposes in peacetime. Rumors, lies, and other forms of disinformation were made public by the Soviet Union to discredit the United States, the latter being the context in which the word is generally applied. The KGB coined the Russian word dezinformatsiya; it came into the English language as disinformation. The technique of disinformation goes back at least to 1918 with the end of World War I. Disinformation as a KGB weapon began in 1923 when I. S. Inshlikht, deputy chairman of the GPU, then the name of the KGB, proposed the establishment of a special disinformation office to conduct active intelligence operations.

Barack Obama is operating his own personal KGB with the express intent of spreading disinformation on private citizens in order to destroy them.

Kimberly Strassel’s article “Trolling for Dirt on the President’s List” describes the harassment and smearing of a Romney supporter and donor.

Three weeks ago, an Obama campaign website, “Keeping GOP Honest,” took the extraordinary step of publicly naming and assailing eight private citizens backing Mr. Romney. Titled “Behind the curtain: a brief history of Romney’s donors,” the post accused the eight of being “wealthy individuals with less-than-reputable records.” Mr. VanderSloot was one of the eight, smeared particularly as being “litigious, combative and a bitter foe of the gay rights movement.”

Vandersloot vigorously denies the accusations but Barack Obama insisted on sliming him.

Mr. VanderSloot has said his attackers have misconstrued facts and made false allegations. In February he wrote a long reply, publicly stating that he has “many gay friends whom I love and respect” who should “have the same freedoms and rights as any other individual.” The Obama campaign’s response, in April, was to single out Mr. VanderSloot and repeat the slurs.

Obama’s KGB is hunting down Vandersloot’s children as well.

“There’s been a ton of electronic media… that have lodged all kind of innuendo in my direction, accused me of all kinds of bad things. People have called my children. They’ve been surfing their LinkedIn sites. They’ve been asking interviews of my kids.“

Vandersloot and his children are not the first victims. The Koch brothers found themselves targets of Obama’s pogrom.

In just about 24 hours, Mitt Romney is headed to a hotel ballroom to give a speech sponsored by Americans for Prosperity, a front group founded and funded by the Koch brothers.
[...]
Those are the same Koch brothers whose business model is to make millions by jacking up prices at the pump, and who have bankrolled Tea Party extremism and committed $200 million to try to destroy President Obama before Election Day.

For the response of the Koch brothers to this assault, go here.

Then something else in Stressel’s article caught my attention.

About a week after that post, a man named Michael Wolf contacted the Bonneville County Courthouse in Idaho Falls in search of court records regarding Mr. VanderSloot. Specifically, Mr. Wolf wanted all the documents dealing with Mr. VanderSloot’s divorces, as well as a case involving a dispute with a former Melaleuca employee.

Divorce records. Hmm.

When I asked what his interest was in Mr. VanderSloot’s divorce records, he hesitated, then said he didn’t want to talk about that. When I asked what his relationship was with Fusion, he hesitated again and said he had “no comment.” “It’s a legal thing,” he added.

Fusion dodged my calls, so I couldn’t ask who was paying it to troll through Mr. VanderSloot’s divorce records. Mr. Simpson finally sent an email stating: “Frank VanderSloot is a figure of interest in the debate over civil rights for gay Americans. As his own record on gay issues amply demonstrates, he is a legitimate subject of public records research into his lengthy history of legal disputes.”

I have seen Obama’s KGB do this in the past. Obama KGB Commissar David Axelrod has been able to magically come into possession of the sealed divorce records of both former Obama opponents Blair Hull and Jack Ryan. The Chicago Tribune (where Axelrod used to work) then began publishing accusations based on information contained in those sealed records- first on Obama primary opponent Hull and then GOP opponent Jack Ryan.

At the intersection of all of these events is Commisar David Axelrod:

Axelrod is known for operating in this gray area, part idealist, part hired muscle. It is difficult to discuss Axelrod in certain circles in Chicago without the matter of the Blair Hull divorce papers coming up. As the 2004 Senate primary neared, it was clear that it was a contest between two people: the millionaire liberal, Hull, who was leading in the polls, and Obama, who had built an impressive grass-roots campaign. About a month before the vote, The Chicago Tribune revealed, near the bottom of a long profile of Hull, that during a divorce proceeding, Hull’s second wife filed for an order of protection. In the following few days, the matter erupted into a full-fledged scandal that ended up destroying the Hull campaign and handing Obama an easy primary victory. The Tribune reporter who wrote the original piece later acknowledged in print that the Obama camp had ”worked aggressively behind the scenes” to push the story. But there are those in Chicago who believe that Axelrod had an even more significant role — that he leaked the initial story. They note that before signing on with Obama, Axelrod interviewed with Hull.

Now Obama endeavors mightily to gain possession of Vandersloot’s divorce records no doubt with the singular desire to destroy his life and the lives of his children.

Obama’s former doctor is quoted as saying

“I think there is too much of the University of Chicago in him. By which I mean he’s academic, lacks passion and feeling, and doesn’t have the sense of humanity that I expected.”

He even suggests that Obama is “Messianic.”

I have opined that Obama is a sociopath and nothing disabuses me of that notion. These are the most scurrilous people ever to infect the White House.

Dragline excavator in the Baltic Oil Shale Basin - Narva

While our MSM continues to wag their tongues all over Obama’s gayness they somehow, someway, missed the news that an auditor from the GAO testified in Congress and said:

“The Green River Formation–an assemblage of over 1,000 feet of sedimentary rocks that lie beneath parts of Colorado, Utah, and Wyoming–contains the world’s largest deposits of oil shale,”Anu K. Mittal, the GAO’s director of natural resources and environment said in written testimony submitted to the House Science Subcommittee on Energy and Environment.

“USGS estimates that the Green River Formation contains about 3 trillion barrels of oil, and about half of this may be recoverable, depending on available technology and economic conditions,” Mittal testified.

“The Rand Corporation, a nonprofit research organization, estimates that 30 to 60 percent of the oil shale in the Green River Formation can be recovered,” Mittal told the subcommittee. “At the midpoint of this estimate, almost half of the 3 trillion barrels of oil would be recoverable. This is an amount about equal to the entire world’s proven oil reserves.”

And this may shock you….but Obama issued new regulations on fracking a few days ago. I know…a Democrat wants more regulations? Who woulda thunk it.

So just in time to hear the great news that the world’s largest oil reserves is on this continent…not Saudi Arabia, not Iran, not Kuwait. But here in the United States we get Obama to eff it all up.

Shocking.

Even more shocking is the lack of media coverage:

Searches on “Government Accountability Office” (not in quotes), “shale,” and “mittal” at the Associated Press’s national site return nothing relevant to the energy-related story which will follow. A Google News search on “Anu Mittal,” the person from the GAO who on Thursday testified before the House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology`s Subcommittee on Energy and Environment, appears to return seven relevant items, but it’s really five. The first is a press release from the Luddite (aka Democratic) members of the committee pooh-poohing the importance of Ms. Mittal’s assertions. The other four are from non-major and/or non-establishment press sources: Newser, American Thinker, Daily Markets, and the Inquisitr (yes, spelled correctly). Only one other news outlet I’m aware of, Media Research Center’s CNS News, has also noted Ms. Mittal’s testimony.

…Of the outlets which did cover it, two of them gratuitously brought the Iraq War into the discussion. Newser’s Neal Colgrass wrote: “Maybe President Bush should have invaded the Midwest instead of Iraq.” Residents of Utah, Colorado, and Wyoming will be amused to learn that Colgrass believe that their states are in the Midwest. They’re not. Similarly, the unbylined Inquisitr report snarked that “While the United States has invaded much of the Middle East in search of lower gas prices, perhaps President Bush should have been focusing his efforts on the Midwest region of the United States during the first Iraq war.” Media bias clearly runs very deep — miles deep, if you will.

Unbiased my ass:

Washington Post ombudsman Patrick Pexton touted the Post’s Romney-haircut “scoop” as a “deeply reported story” that “holds up to scrutiny.” But the family of the haircut victims told ABC it was “factually inaccurate” and it shouldn’t be used as a political football. Pexton said nonsense: the Post has received “no specific complaint of inaccuracy.”

Perhaps more shocking is that the Post shamelessly admits they timed this story precisely to echo on the day after President Obama’s big pro-gay announcement. They actually waited a day longer than planned to let Obama have the front page to himself when he was being “historic.” Pexton’s only nod to the right: he panned the sneaky update that’s still not a “correction”:

Stu White was portrayed in the original story as being “disturbed” by the alleged haircut incident for decades, and then it was amended to a couple of weeks. That’s embarrassing, but not to the shameless Post

Our media is beyond shameless. They have all but announced their intention. Get Obama elected by targeting Romney for anything.

Example.

Romney address at Liberty Univ. sparks controversy

Mitt Romney is to deliver the commencement address Saturday at Virginia’s Liberty University, the largest evangelical college in the country.

His visit has stirred debate in the conservative Christian community, because some believe his Mormon faith is a cult.

Bryan Preston notes:

Protestants are the nation’s largest religious group, and evangelicals are the largest group within that group. Since when is it controversial for a presidential candidate to speak to such a large and mainstream group?

But bring up the fact that Obama borrowed language from prior Communist dictators as his campaign slogan and the MSM goes silent.

Bryan Preston again:

But to the same MSM, it’s not controversial — it’s not even worth a follow-up report — that President Obama is using the power of the presidency to bully private citizens right now.

The same media that praises Obama for “evolving,” makes controversy anytime Mitt Romney even appears to think about changing his mind on anything.

The Tea Party — controversial. Occupy, with its rapes and other crimes — darlings.

The Koch brothers — controversial. George Soros — philanthropist.

Our media is blatantly behind the Democrats. And now the Democrats are receiving training to help their puppets in smearing every Conservative:

House Democrats received training this week on how to raise the issue of race to defend government programs, according to training materials obtained by The Washington Examiner.

…The prepared content of a Tuesday presentation to the House Democratic Caucus and staff indicates that Democrats will seek to portray apparently neutral free-market rhetoric as being charged with racial bias, conscious or unconscious.

…In her distributed remarks, Maya Wiley of the Center for Social Inclusion criticized “conservative messages [that are] racially ‘coded’ and had images of people of color that we commonly see used” and proposed tactics for countering the Republicans’ (presumably) racially-coded rhetoric.

Exit video

Just a few short days ago the-MSM and the left went after Romney for not taking a supporter to task for calling Obama’s actions treasonous.

While Romney can’t be held responsible for everything his supporters say, it seems reasonable to expect him to stand up to the fringe in his party, especially when he’s providing a platform for their views (it was his microphone, after all).

Will we get to see the same from the MSM and the left about this? (h/t Hot Air & Gateway Pundit)

The shout from the crowd was clear. As President Barack Obama gave the first official campaign speech of his re-election bid at a sports arena in Ohio last weekend the first mention of his Republican opponent Mitt Romney prompted a male voice in the throng to yell: “Traitor!”

Click here to view the embedded video.

I’m sure ABC, the NYT’s and Thinkprogess are working on articles as we speak about this outrage…..right?

Former NYTimes executive editor (from July 2003 until September 2011) Bill Keller regarding FOX News in an op-ed over the weekend:

It is the most reliable profit center, expected to net a billion dollars this fiscal year. It is untainted so far by the metastasizing scandals. It is a source of political influence more durable than Murdoch’s serial romances with British prime ministers. This year the Fox News Primary probably did more to nominate Mitt Romney than New Hampshire or Michigan.

And yet I would argue that — at least for Americans — Fox News is Murdoch’s most toxic legacy.

Ouch.

Put down the coffee and make sure you have none of it in your mouth when you read this next part:

My gripe against Fox is not that it is conservative. The channel’s pulpit-pounding pundits, with the exception of the avuncular Mike Huckabee, are too shrill for my taste, but they are not masquerading as impartial newsmen. Nor am I indignant that Fox News is the cultural home of the Republican Party and a nonstop Obama roast. Partisan journalism, while not my thing, has a long tradition. Though I do wonder if the folks at Fox appreciate that this genre is more European than American.

My complaint is that Fox pretends very hard to be something it is not, and in the process contributes to the corrosive cynicism that has polarized our public discourse.

I doubt that people at Fox News really believe their programming is “fair and balanced” — that’s just a slogan for the suckers — but they probably are convinced that what they have created is the conservative counterweight to a media elite long marinated in liberal bias. They believe that they are doing exactly what other serious news organizations do; they just do it for an audience that had been left out before Fox came along.

I would never suggest that what is now called “the mainstream media” — the news organizations that most Americans depended on over the past century — achieved a golden mean. We have too often been condescending to those who don’t share our secular urban vantage point. We are too easily seduced by access. We can be credulous. (It’s also true that we have sometimes been too evenhanded, giving equal time to arguments that fail a simple fact-check.)

But we try to live by a code, a discipline, that tells us to set aside our personal biases, to test not only facts but the way they add up,

*Sniff-sniff*….smell that? It’s the stench of elitist bull****.

Just what planet is Keller from that he is so oblivious and lacking in self-awareness?

to seek out the dissenters and let them make their best case, to show our work. We write unsparing articles about public figures of every stripe — even, sometimes, about ourselves. When we screw up — and we do — we are obliged to own up to our mistakes and correct them.

By doing what? Burying the corrections on page A12?!

Fox does not live by that code.

~~~

Why does this matter? In the digital era of do-it-yourself news consumption, it is easier than ever to assemble an information diet that simply confirms your prejudices. Traditional news organizations, for all their shortcomings, see it as their mission to provide — and test — the information you need to form intelligent opinions. We aim to challenge lazy assumptions. Fox panders to them.

Tim Groseclose of UCLA along with Jeff Milyo of the University of Missouri published a paper in 2004 measuring media bias. What did they find:

Our results show a strong liberal bias. All of the news outlets except Fox News’ Special Report and the Washington Times received a score to the left of the average member of Congress. And a few outlets, including the New York Times and CBS Evening News, were closer to the average Democrat in Congress than the center. These findings refer strictly to the news stories of the outlets. That is, we omitted editorials, book reviews, and letters to the editor from our sample.

~~~

our method concludes that the New York Times has a liberal bias. However, in no way does this imply that the New York Times is inaccurate or dishonest

~~~

For instance, the two most conservative outlets are the Washington Times and Fox News’ Special Report, two outlets that are often called conservative (e.g. see Alterman, 2003). Near the liberal end are CBS Evening News and the New York Times. Again, these are largely consistent with the conventional wisdom.

Groseclose and Milyo’s findings suggest that Fox News’ Special Report with Brit Hume is the 5th most centrist news source in their study, whereas,

The New York Times is slightly more than twice as far from the center as Special Report. Consequently, to gain a balanced perspective, a news consumer would need to spend twice as much time watching Special Report as he or she spends reading the New York Times. Alternatively, to gain a balanced perspective, a reader would need to spend 50% more time reading the Washington Times than the New York Times.

Keller’s op-ed:

For a salient point of reference, compare Fox’s soft-pedaling of the Murdoch troubles with the far more prominent coverage in The Wall Street Journal, which has managed under Murdoch’s ownership to retain its serious-journalism DNA.

The Groseclose-Milyo study also points out what I suspect most FA readers are already well aware of: That the WSJ tilts liberal (according to the study’s findings, even further to the left than the New York Times); where it is conservative is in its opinion section.

The fact that Keller thinks WSJ has “retained its serious-journalism DNA” merely reveals how high-minded, self-important elitist liberal journalists regard themselves as above partisan bias in their straight news reporting; and that they fail to see the bias in other outlets because they agree with the perspective and language. It all sounds so fair, balanced, and reasonable when others agree with your political perspective. When Keller writes:

Partisan journalism, while not my thing, has a long tradition. Though I do wonder if the folks at Fox appreciate that this genre is more European than American.

It just makes me shake my head at the lack of self-awareness.

I don’t have as much of a problem with the bias as I do with the dishonesty that the NYTimes is objective and non-biased. I’d have more respect for journalists and news rags if they’d simply own up to their political leanings and perspective. It would be a more honest way of reporting, regardless if they are covering the straight news or printing editorials. Reporters should not be afraid of being open to readers and viewers in regards to their personal politics. Enough with the masquerade and illusion of objectivity. Drop the pretense or delusion of non-partisan, detached perspective in reporting.

Pg 62-65, Arrogance (2003) by Bernard Goldberg:

The Times still looks and feels like a great newspaper. It has news bureaus all over the world. The paper itself is hefty and contains all kinds of sections. And more to the point, its reporters are smart and sophisticated- probably as strong a group of journalists as you can find anywhere. And of course, the cast majority of the articles have nothing to do with ideology. yet what’s so surprising is how many do, and how ideology regularly gets shoehorned into places you’d never expect to find it- not just in pieces in the editorial or book or culture sections but, for instance, on the sports pages, too, where diversity and feminist issues are always being rammed down readers’ throats. Reading the New York Times these days can be like taking a PC bath.

~~~

As soon as you move into lifestyle journalism, it’s basically all opinion. Today there are lifestyle stories on page one almost every day. And lifestyle is an inherently liberal concept- it’s a term that you only hear conservatives use sarcastically, because it implies perpetual change and the denigration of traditional standards.

~~~

As the women’s movement picked up steam, its appeal was precisely to the sorts of people who comprise the Times core constituency- privileged liberals who like to see themselves as cutting-edge and socially aware. The Times had always been an editorially liberal paper- responsibly and intelligently liberal. But now, as more and more of its reporters and editors emerged from the hip sixties generation, it took on an aggressive liberal-activist edge.

For committed feminists, gay activists, multiculturalists, and all the others who took their side in the culture wars that grew in intensity in the eighties and nineties, “neutrality” was nothing to be admired. The very point of the movements they supported was to attack and undermine traditional forms of thought and behavior.

~~~

These days reporters and editors at the Times pick up the language of the Left either without noticing or, if they do, without even caring.

Biased Brent Bozell:

Keller tut-tutted that Fox can’t really believe its shows are “fair and balanced,” because “that’s just a slogan for suckers.” And “All The News That’s Fit to Print” is for scholars? Isn’t the “fair and balanced” just as implied when Keller talks of how the media elites have a “code” where we “set aside our personal biases”?

But think of that Times slogan for a minute. The key words for Keller are “fit to print.” In the glory days of pre-Fox journalism, if the Times insisted a story — let’s just guess a story that gores the liberal ox — was not “fit to print,” the story was deep-sixed. Spiked. Axed.

The real reason Fox is somehow “America’s Poison” is because of its willingness to go around the liberal censorship wish list and define what is “fit to print” in a different way. If Keller really liked “seeking out the dissenters,” wouldn’t he applaud Fox instead of comparing it to metaphorical cyanide?

Instead, Keller unspools the classic liberal complaint that what’s wrong with “news” consumers these days is they often seek “an information diet that simply confirms your prejudices.” The elitists in “traditional news organizations … see it as their mission see it as their mission to provide — and test — the information you need to form intelligent opinions. We aim to challenge lazy assumptions. Fox panders to them.”

Ah, those insufferable elites. But here’s what really, truly gets them: We don’t have to suffer them any more. We don’t have to rip up our morning papers daily. Only the subscription notices, once.

Now conservatives have choices. Now we can insist that it’s liberal twits such as Arthur Sulzberger who are “not fit” for media ownership, at least not the kind we want to bankroll. The republic will survive without having its information diet loaded with the empty calories of The New York Times.

Also biasly blogging:

NewsBusters