Dog Brothers Public Forum
Return To Homepage
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
May 21, 2013, 01:17:14 AM

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
Welcome to the Dog Brothers Public Forum.
71237 Posts in 2156 Topics by 1022 Members
Latest Member: RSB
* Home Help Search Login Register
+  Dog Brothers Public Forum
|-+  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities
| |-+  Politics & Religion
| | |-+  Media Issues
« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 23 24 [25] Print
Author Topic: Media Issues  (Read 135495 times)
objectivist1
Power User
***
Posts: 341


« Reply #1200 on: April 27, 2013, 01:54:36 PM »

CCP:  No - you are not the only one.  I find it disgusting as well.  Sickening.

Here is a further analysis:  www.theatlanticwire.com/politics/2013/04/nerd-prom-white-house-correspondents-dinner-guests/64606/
« Last Edit: April 27, 2013, 02:14:34 PM by objectivist1 » Logged

"You have enemies?  Good.  That means that you have stood up for something, sometime in your life." - Winston Churchill.
objectivist1
Power User
***
Posts: 341


« Reply #1201 on: April 30, 2013, 06:06:11 PM »

If Obama is not a Muslim, he certainly gives a damn good imitation of it:

AP Scrubs ‘Muslim’ from Obama’s Self-Referential Joke
Robert Spencer - April 30, 2013

Warner Todd Huston reported at Breitbart Monday that “in some of its reports on Saturday night’s White House Correspondents Dinner (WHCD), the Associated Press failed to include one of President Obama’s own gags.”

Obama said: “These days I look in the mirror and have to admit, I’m not the strapping young Muslim Socialist that I used to be.” But, noted Huston, “in one version of the night’s story (as seen at Huffington Post, Time Magazine, Breitbart Wires, the Ottawa Citizen, and The Columbian to name a few), the AP’s Bradley Klapper forgot one part of the President’s joke,” reporting his words as “I’m not the strapping young Socialist that I used to be,”

Why? Did they think it had too much of a ring of truth?

Why did some editors at AP or at the publications that picked up the AP story think it necessary to run interference for Obama on this point?

By mocking the idea that he is a Muslim (and a Socialist), Obama is trying to render these things too ridiculous for serious public discussion. Fine. His personal beliefs are of no moment, except insofar as they influence his public stances. And the direction of his public policies is obvious. He has maintained a consistent foreign policy line that has enabled the establishment of several Islamic supremacist, pro-Sharia states in North Africa and the Middle East, and a domestic policy that has enabled the advance of the Islamic supremacist agenda to assert the primacy of Islamic law over American law and practice wherever they conflict. No amount of mockery will obscure that.

The record is clear. As demonstrations and revolts swept the Muslim world during Obama’s first term, he was enthusiastic. He had encouraging words for the “Arab Spring” demonstrators in Egypt and Tunisia, and even gave military assistance to their Libyan counterparts. During the third and last debate of the 2012 presidential campaign, Mitt Romney and Obama sparred over which could express support for the Syrian rebels (who are dominated by Islamic jihadists) more strongly, and as Obama’s second term began, his administration was inching ever closer to military aid for those rebels. Yet there were two large-scale demonstrations in Muslim countries that Obama did not support – and those two exceptions are extraordinarily revealing about his disposition, as well as his policy, toward Islam.

The two pro-democracy revolts that Obama refused to support were arguably the only two that were genuinely worthy of the pro-democracy label: the demonstrations against the Islamic regime in Iran in 2009, and the anti-Muslim Brotherhood demonstrations in Egypt in winter 2013. There is a common thread between these two that distinguishes them from all the others: in Egypt in late 2012 and early 2013, as well as in Iran in 2009, the demonstrators were protesting against Islamic states; all the other demonstrations led to the establishment of Islamic states. To be sure, the Iranian demonstrators in 2009 contained many pro-Sharia elements that simply objected to the way the Islamic Republic was enforcing Sharia, but they also included many who wanted to reestablish the relatively secular society that prevailed under the last Shah. Whether the Sharia or the democratic forces would have won out in the end is a question that will never be answered – in no small part thanks to Barack Obama.

In every case Barack Obama has been consistent: in response to the demonstrations and uprisings in the Islamic world, he has without exception acted in the service of Islamic supremacist, pro-Sharia regimes. For whatever complex of personal affinity and political calculation, he has steered the United States, in the words of the Egyptian newspaper Rose el-Youssef, “from a position hostile to Islamic groups and organizations in the world to the largest and most important supporter of the Muslim Brotherhood.”

The transformation of U.S. foreign and domestic policy is the most significant manifestation of Obama’s warmly positive stance toward Islam. Speaking at the Pentagon in 2010 on the ninth anniversary of 9/11, Barack Obama returned to a recurring theme of his presidency: that the attacks on Americans and the war that has been declared against the West have nothing do with Islam. “As Americans, we will not and never will be at war with Islam,” Obama declared, echoing almost verbatim words he used in his June 2009 Cairo address, and then adding: “It was not a religion that attacked us that September day. It was al-Qaeda, a sorry band of men, which perverts religion.”

George W. Bush had affirmed that the U.S. was not at war with Islam, but Obama drove home the point in numerous ways: purging military and intelligence training materials of any mention of Islam in connection with terrorism; employing the might of the Justice Department to win special accommodation for Muslims in workplaces and schools; and lending the prestige and power of his administration to the Organization of Islamic Cooperation’s efforts to compel Western states to criminalize criticism of Islam.

Not a bad record for a self-described “Muslim Socialist,” however facetiously he meant the appellation. No wonder AP was embarrassed for him.
Logged

"You have enemies?  Good.  That means that you have stood up for something, sometime in your life." - Winston Churchill.
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 25345


« Reply #1202 on: May 08, 2013, 06:06:23 PM »



http://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/sharyl-attkisson-of-cbs-news-a-persistent-voice-of-media-skepticism-on-benghazi/2013/05/07/a6006118-b749-11e2-b94c-b684dda07add_print.html
Logged
G M
Power User
***
Posts: 10556


« Reply #1203 on: May 08, 2013, 08:05:00 PM »


Someone is about to get a dose of the Woodward treatment.
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 25345


« Reply #1204 on: May 10, 2013, 10:03:09 AM »

http://www.gopusa.com/news/2013/05/10/government-unions-oppose-newspaper-sale-to-koch-brothers-on-political-grounds/?subscriber=1
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 25345


« Reply #1205 on: May 11, 2013, 10:15:35 AM »



http://www.gopusa.com/theloft/2013/05/11/white-house-holds-secret-briefing-for-select-media-on-benghazi/
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 25345


« Reply #1206 on: May 11, 2013, 07:34:46 PM »

http://www.therightscoop.com/richard-grenell-both-abc-and-cbs-presidents-have-siblings-that-work-for-obama-at-the-white-house/
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 25345


« Reply #1207 on: May 12, 2013, 10:36:36 AM »

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/05/11/cbs-anchor-scolds-were-getting-the-big-stories-wrong-over-and-over-again/
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 25345


« Reply #1208 on: May 13, 2013, 02:10:37 PM »

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/05/13/this-is-tyranny-msnbc-hosts-lambaste-obama-admin-irs-over-unspeakable-targeting-of-conservatives/
Logged
bigdog
Power User
***
Posts: 1646


« Reply #1209 on: May 13, 2013, 05:14:34 PM »

http://bigstory.ap.org/article/govt-obtains-wide-ap-phone-records-probe

From the article:

Prosecutors have sought phone records from reporters before, but the seizure of records from such a wide array of AP offices, including general AP switchboards numbers and an office-wide shared fax line, is unusual.
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 25345


« Reply #1210 on: May 13, 2013, 06:29:06 PM »

There are twol facets to this matter, which, given whose ox is begin gored, is likely to attract media attention:

1) First Amendment issues
2) National Security/Intel Issues

As I see things, there is an inherent tension here between the government having matters which are properly and necessarily to be kept secret and the fact that government uses that as a justification to declare "Secret!!!" on matters that are simply inconvenient.

I for one railed at the irresponsible and even unpatriotic disclosures during the Iraq War (e.g. that we were funding Iraqi journalists) and the Afpakia War (e.g. that we were tracking financial flows of AQ, that we were reading the geology of the rocks behind OBL when he released his videos as a way of trying to determine where he was).  OTOH I am all for the whistle-blowers helping the American people find out what really happened at Benghazi.

Here, initial reports read like AG Holder and his minions went well overboard.
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 25345


« Reply #1211 on: May 13, 2013, 08:02:31 PM »

Second post of the day:

http://www.daybydaycartoon.com/2013/05/14/
Logged
G M
Power User
***
Posts: 10556


« Reply #1212 on: May 14, 2013, 06:58:47 PM »

https://www.facebook.com/LarryConnersKMOV/posts/10151393396885544

Larry Conners KMOV


 
Shortly after I did my April 2012 interview with President Obama, my wife, friends and some viewers suggested that I might need to watch out for the IRS.
 I don't accept "conspiracy theories", but I do know that almost immediately after the interview, the IRS started hammering me.
 At the time, I dismissed the "co-incidence", but now, I have concerns ... after revelations about the IRS targeting various groups and their members.
 Originally, the IRS apologized for red-flagging conservative groups and their members if they had "Tea Party" or "patriot" in their name.
 Today, there are allegations that the IRS focused on various groups and/or individuals questioning or criticizing government spending, taxes, debt or how the government is run ... any involved in limiting/expanding government, educating on the constitution and bill of rights, or social economic reform/movement.
 In that April 2012 interview, I questioned President Obama on several topics: the Buffet Rule, his public remarks about the Supreme Court before the ruling on the Affordable Care Act. I also asked why he wasn't doing more to help Sen. Claire McCaskill who at that time was expected to lose. The Obama interview caught fire and got wide-spread attention because I questioned his spending.
 I said some viewers expressed concern, saying they think he's "out of touch" because of his personal and family trips in the midst of our economic crisis.
 The President's face clearly showed his anger; afterwards, his staff which had been so polite ... suddenly went cold.
 That's to be expected, and I can deal with that just as I did with President George H. Bush's staff when he didn't like my questions.
 Journalistic integrity is of the utmost importance to me. My job is to ask the hard questions, because I believe viewers have a right to be well-informed. I cannot and will not promote anyone's agenda - political or otherwise - at the expense of the reporting the truth.
 What I don't like to even consider ... is that because of the Obama interview … the IRS put a target on me.
 Can I prove it? At this time, no.
 But it is a fact that since that April 2012 interview ... the IRS has been pressuring me.
Logged
bigdog
Power User
***
Posts: 1646


« Reply #1213 on: May 15, 2013, 08:40:03 AM »

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/348217/jay-carney%E2%80%99s-waterloo
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 25345


« Reply #1214 on: May 15, 2013, 11:43:10 AM »

Although I certainly am glad for the Republic that the systemic lies to the American people about who it was that was attacking us at Benghazi are finally receiving the attention they should have received before the election, I confess to a cerain , , , je ne se quoi that there is a certain pompous self-importance to the press here.  They only care when "they" get lied to (or listened to by DOJ) not when we the people get lied to or listened to.

As I have noted here before, I find it far more important that our Commander in Chief, our Secretary of State, our Secretary of Defense, African Command General Hamm (I maybe misstating his title a bit here) all refused to go to the aid of Americans under fire and that they seem to think their failure to try is excusable because they claim they wouldn't have gotten there in time anyway.   The depth of the apparent moral and patriotic depravity here is extraordinary-- yet the pravdas seem only to care that "You lied to US.  Don't you know how important WE are?"

Not as important as those in harm's way I'm thinking , , ,  angry angry angry
Logged
ccp
Power User
***
Posts: 3102


« Reply #1215 on: May 15, 2013, 12:01:06 PM »

Yes Crafty .   Your points are huge take away here.

I hope this all serves as an education in left wing propaganda to the youth of our nation who were naïve enough to fall for Obama.  

Thank God for Fox and talk radio.

Without *our voices* being heard we could only imagine the boundless corruption of the left media, academia, and Democrat party .  As it is it is  a nightmare.

Hopefully the Republicans can regain their footing.  They need to be extra tough here.  IMHO their platform is big government equals corruption, incompetence, and stagnation.

But they need to give the alternative positive agenda.  IMHO they do need to speak of fairness.   Something akin, not blaming the rich but simply hold them to the same standards as those who are not.

Is it finally time to invest in oil gas etc?   Screw wind solar and e-vehicles.
Logged
bigdog
Power User
***
Posts: 1646


« Reply #1216 on: May 17, 2013, 06:55:05 AM »

http://www.lawfareblog.com/2013/05/explainer-on-the-ap-subpoenas-controversy/
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 23 24 [25] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.17 | SMF © 2011, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!