Our Loathsome Media – Here And Everywhere

This blog has always been dedicated to the idea that the mainstream media is a PR firm for the Democrat party nationally, and the DFL in Minnesota.

DFLMinistryofTruthLARGE

While there are capable, honest reporters in the Twin Cities and nationally who do make a level effort to cover the news rather than paint Democrat toenails and safeguard their dinner reservations at Brothers, it’s this blog’s considered opinion that the American media has long since ceased being a “check and balance” on anyone but conservatives and the GOP.

It’s been much in the news this past week.

Michael Goodwin at the NYPost notes the extent to which the mainstream media has become, without no hyperbole whatsoever, an arm of Hillary Clinton’s campaign:

A recent article by its media reporter, Jim Rutenberg, whom I know and like, began this way: “If you’re a working journalist and you believe that Donald J. Trump is a demagogue playing to the nation’s worst racist and nationalistic tendencies, that he cozies up to anti-American dictators and that he would be dangerous with control of the United States nuclear codes, how the heck are you supposed to cover him?”

Whoa, Nellie. The clear assumption is that many reporters see Trump that way, and it is note­worthy that no similar question is raised about Clinton, whose scandals are deserving only of “scrutiny.” Rutenberg approvingly cites a leftist journalist who calls one candidate “normal” and the other ­“abnormal.”

Clinton is hardly “normal” to the 68 percent of Americans who find her dishonest and untrustworthy, though apparently not a single one of those people writes for the Times. Statistically, that makes the Times “abnormal.”

Also, you don’t need to be a ­detective to hear echoes in that first paragraph of Clinton speeches and ads, including those featured prominently on the Times’ Web site. In effect, the paper has seamlessly ­adopted Clinton’s view as its own, then tries to justify its coverage.

But that’s a bit of bias that has long, deep roots; most of the American media seemed eager to finish for Bill Clinton the job Monica Lewinski started.

Meanwhile, locally, at a Donald Trump rally last week, “protesters” – pro-Democrat agitators – repeatedly attacked, hit and spat on people attending a Donald Trump meeting in Minneapolis.  You‘d never know if from most of the media, as John Gilmore reports:

But not even I was prepared for what followed: a sustained assault on citizens attempting to leave that venue while Minneapolis police stood by, for the most part. Some performed admirably and to them much credit should be given. Yet it wasn’t nearly enough.

There were first hand reports of people being spat upon, physically assaulted and some who had their property stolen. There were even reports of people themselves being spray painted. Many of those committing the assaults on white people were identified as black, but certainly not exclusively.

Minneapolis has become a lawless city, on the verge of becoming yet another Third World City, and last Friday night proved it beyond doubt. Those who have a different political view from the reigning majority were persecuted for simply exercising their constitutional right of assembly.

Twin Cities media reporting of the night’s events proved a mixed bag. There is no doubt that had the political polarities been reversed the coverage would have been far more extensive, breathless and condemnatory. But because the victims were republicans, much was glossed over. Which is to say, the violence.

Minnesota media should be ashamed of itself but it doesn’t really possess the capacity.

Read the whole thing.

For the sake of the city’s good, conscientious reporters, I do hope there’s some sort of future out there in writing actual news.

That future is not with the current legacy news media.

20 thoughts on “Our Loathsome Media – Here And Everywhere

  1. I was tearing the pelt off a stinking lefty last night, and while doing the necessary FACTCHECK, I ran across this gem from 2001. The first part addresses all the stuff the thieving hillbillies took when they moved out of the White House, but then:

    Lawmakers are questioning Clinton’s desire to rent expensive office space in New York City at government expense. Because of the contention, the former president’s foundation has offered to pay at least $300,000 of an estimated $790,000 annual rent for the office Clinton favors.

    There it is, friends. Evidently the MSM has forgotten the Clinton’s ADMITTED they diverted money for poor kids with AIDS to rent Hillary a luxury office in Manhattan.

    And there is more…

    Mrs. Clinton, the new senator from New York, has faced questions about the propriety of accepting the gifts in the period between her election and her swearing-in. Senate rules would have limited what she could accept had she been a senator.

    http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=121856&page=1

    Hellllloooo…McFly?

    This is EXACTLY what Trump has been saying she WOULD DO if elected…no surprise there, she already done it!

    What are we doing? Why has this woman not been tarred and feathered?

  2. via Gateway Pundit:

    WOW! These people are sooo corrupt! Monmouth University released a poll today that had Donald Trump defeating Hillary Clinton. Trump was up 41-39 so they weighted the poll with more Democrats to give Hillary the lead. WOW!

  3. I’ve opined that it might be wise to carry some pepper spray when there is a chance you might run into some reprobate leftists.

    I still think that’s a good idea, but I’m beginning to think it also might be a good idea just to preemptively hose down every leftist that comes within the range of your pepper spray stream. You know that they are going to assault your intelligence, your sense of decency and if they get close enough, most probably your olfactory senses too…so spend the extra couple bucks and get the 15′ model.

  4. they are going to assault your intelligence

    JD, would that stand up in court? Sounds like a very credible and immediate threat.

  5. TI dunno, JPA, the problem is that you’d have to prove to a court packed full of Liberals that you had any intelligence to insult which, as all good Liberals know, is impossible. All Liberals know in their hearts that all Conservatives are uniformly stupid except when they’re also evil so it’d be a tough case and I’d recommend getting a huge retainer fee.

  6. 1. You haven’t shown that the mainstream media is deficient factually, or that they are apologists for the Dems.

    2. Right wing media is scum, they – including you – peddle fact averse stories that gin up unwarranted paranoia, lacking both evidence and critical thinking.

    3. Case in point would be the Red State anti-Trump story claiming Donald Trump was connected to and licensed his name to Trump escorts, followed by the Dail Fail/Mail tabloid story that Melanoma Trump was a highly paid sex worker in 1995/6.

    Red State doesn’t like Trump either; but it was the WaPo that turned up the facts — that Trump had NEVER licensed his name to the Escort Biz, and had in fact sent them a cease and desist letter (and the escort service promptly changed their name).

    Yeah, what YOU call Lefty Media reported a story defending Trump.

    I can only wonder if the Powerturd story asserting immigration fraud against Ms. Omar from an anonymous source without evidence — like the righties do – was driven by the very legitimate questions raised about Melanoma Trump’s immigration compliance and work experience.

    You have nothing, as usual. If anything Trump has had too much lax media coverage, not preferential treatment of Clinton. Here is one example of a media analysis that demonstrated that.
    http://www.vox.com/2016/4/15/11410160/hillary-clinton-media-bernie-sanders

    You are correct that facts are not your friend, but that’s your fault not a negative aspect of facts. You avoid and deny and outright lie about facts, and as a result you and your media consumers are not fact based, and have a skewed and crazy world view that is contradicted by facts.

    Again, not simply my observation but the observation of many of those finally abandoning the right over Trump, rejecting not only the candidate but the direction you extremists have gone over the years.

  7. I spent part of today writing about how differently the left and right media operate, noting the lack of fact and ethics on the right, the lack of quality sourcing and the prevalence of single sourcing and anonymous sourcing and the lack of evidence routinely found in their writing and especially their accusations, leading to an uninformed base and a lot of wackobird conspiracy theories.

    It included the WaPo Trump Escort service story,, which was how I happened to have that example readily to hand.

    But I bumped it after Pen wrote a parody of your fantasy pieces. It was about you, just in case there might be any lingering question.

  8. Something else worth mentioning here, since you are once again whining on about being a victim of the left and mainstream media when you are far from it, something YOU would never write about is that there is no apparent problem or foundation to the anonymous accusation about Ilhan Omar marrying her brother or immigration fraud. Because you’re oh so big on pushing stories that are lies, that you never look at critically or fact check when the right wants to lie big. But you NEVER post about it when those lies fizzle — as they do here.

    http://www.citypages.com/news/fox-9-removes-story-about-investigation-into-ilhan-omars-marriage-history/391034811

    The only real reason to stop by SitD is to see what the right wing nut lie of the day is from the right, so it can be debunked.

  9. According to his bio in the wikipedia, Rutenberg has a bachelors from NYU and has worked at a few general news publications in the New York area, usually covering fluff.
    He has a right to an opinion, like anyone else. No one elected him ‘truth dispenser.” He certainly is not qualified for that position.
    Schools of journalism are a recent invention. Even most journalists would, I think, have a hard time justifying their existence. They originated in another age to suit the needs that age.

  10. Dog Gone:

    Please reply to this message if you want me to take your four comments out of moderation.

    Just indicate you’ve read this thread after commenting. .

    Thanks.

  11. just remember Mitch, Dog Gone doesn’t want to engage with you – she is too cowardly for that, she just wants access to your audience hoping that some fellow travelers will see her for the shining intellectual star ONLY she believes she is. Dog Gone believes she is engaging in and edgy guerilla journalism in a manner too clever for you to discern. If her comments aren’t on point to your post don’t release them from moderation.

  12. Sauk,

    Oh, I know.

    Two of the four are on point – but this time I’m testing her.

  13. At a boy Mitch. I for one have no interest in seeing what is in the burning bag dog threw on your porch.

  14. Pingback: In The Mailbox: 08.24.16 : The Other McCain

  15. I’m sure we’re all too lacking in nuance to understand what Dog Gone is trying to teach us anyway.

  16. Beyond the synapses required to make us breathe, regulate our heart and BP and evacuate our bowels and bladders, liberals do not see a conservative brain as having a cognitive mission – certainly not a spiritual mission! Being a former lib, I can’t tell you how many of my old friends believe I’m no more functional than a breathing paper weight.

  17. Hmm. Since all we hear from DG is deafening silence, it appears that to no one’s surprise, everyone’s assertions about her post motives are right on the money.

  18. The very fact that Mad Dog tried to post four comments really does indicate she thinks this is her blog. Maybe it’s the Mad Dog speaking, so to speak.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.