Right off the bat C-SPAN should have aired this hearing. There is absolutely no excuse not to air it on TV. Since I had to stream it online I kept my TV on DirecTV News Mix to keep an eye on the news. The only network that had consistent coverage of the testimony was FOX News. I’m not shocked at all. I didn’t see anything about the testimony on the other channels. Jeff Poor from The Daily Caller helped me keep an eye on MSNBC and he didn’t see anything. He said they were hung up on Donald Trump all day. I was informed by a friend on Twitter, Doug Mataconis, that the hearing was discussed on The Situation Room on CNN for about 15 minutes. “Special Report” and The FOX Report both started off with Mr. Holder’s testimony.

Before I continue I noticed some friends on Twitter growing upset that headlines were partisan. The MSM was right: This was a partisan fight and every single Democrat coddled Mr. Holder. The Republicans were the only ones to demand withheld documents and answers from Mr. Holder.

Right after the testimony ended I began searching for coverage of the hearing on Google. First stop was Associated Press. Remember: If the AP doesn’t write anything on Fast & Furious more than likely the rest of the media won’t mention it. Pete Yost did write about the testimony, but hat’s where the excitement ends. Again, he distorts information to favor Mr. Holder and the Department of Justice. Mr. Yost fails to mention the subpoena was issued October 12, 2011. That’s 4 months ago. That is plenty of time to go through the hoops to release the documents. Mr. Yost says, “Though neither side said so, negotiations are almost certain to be the next step.” If you watched the testimony do you honestly think Mr. Issa or Mr. Holder will negotiate? Didn’t think so. Mr. Issa won’t accept anything less than the documents he needs. Then Mr. Yost describes a few dialogues, but doesn’t bother to get down to nitty gritty of the testimony.

(more…)

Oh look! The Justice Department decides to dump 500 pages on Congress on a Friday night! If they really want to be secretive or different they’d choose to dump documents on a Tuesday night. We’re almost looking forward to Friday nights because that’s when we can expect anything about Fast and Furious from the Justice Department.

Attorney General Eric Holder is set to testify on Thursday, February 2 in front of the Oversight and Government Reform Committee so it’s no surprise there was a dump last night. I was looking through my timeline when I saw Michelle Malkin’s tweet about the documents. The link led to NPR, which shocked me they would be the ones to have it plus they included nine pages of the documents. They beat the AP! I have found unless the AP writes about Fast and Furious the majority of the Old Media won’t touch it.

I went to sleep around midnight central time and at that time the only major outlets that covered it were AP, CNN, Washington Post, FOX News, and ABC News. This morning I woke up and saw USA Today posted the AP article. The story was the main story on the front page of their national section, but has since been replaced. It’s not even on the front page anymore. I’d give them props, but it appeared before 6AM and taken down before 9AM CDT. Sorry guys, it doesn’t count when you have it up and taken down before the majority of the country wakes up. It’s also nowhere on the FOX News home page and it’s buried in the politics section. Shame on them since they’ve been consistent with Fast and Furious coverage. CNN does receive credit because it’s still on their home page.

At The Washington Post and ABC News you have to go a search for Fast and Furious in order to find their AP article. The New York Times also buried the AP article. In order to find it you have to go to the bottom of their home page and find the tiny cube for “More News From AP and Reuters.” Click on AP and it’s under AP Politics. But you have to click AP Politics and scroll to the bottom. Even if you search “Fast and Furious” it doesn’t bring up the article. I consider this as NOT covering it New York Times! I’m very disappointed The Washington Times hasn’t even mentioned it. I haven’t seen anything on CBS News either. MSNBC buried the AP article.

Here’s the thing. I know these outlets have investigative reporters. The emails gave me more questions than answers and I’m wondering why no one in the Old Media is pointing this out. I receive Google Alerts for Eric Holder and Operation Fast and Furious. This morning a blog post from Stop The ACLU popped up addressing the same questions I had. NPR brings up this part in the emails, but ignores it and doesn’t realize the importance. Right after Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry passed away Monty Wilkinson, Mr. Holder’s deputy chief of staff,  emails Dennis Burke (bold my emphasis), “Tragic. I’ve alerted the AG, the Acting DAG, Lisa, etc.”

(more…)

Media outlets didn’t cover March For Life while it happened, despite knowing it was going to happen and hundreds of thousands of people there. News outlets do have stories on it now, but of course the number of people there are distorted and the stories are pretty bland. Again, remember how much effort went into Occupy Wall Street coverage. Reporters were at the scenes. News stations were always on them. Also if they had anyone on the scene at March For Life they’d have a more accurate number of people.

Photo Credit Michelle Fields from The Daily Caller

The best coverage belongs to Judge Andrew Napolitano on his show  ”Freedom Watch” on FOX Business Network. Judge Napolitano is a fierce pro-life advocate and doesn’t shy away from the issue. At the end of every show he signs off with “The Plain Truth” and yesterday it was about abortion.

His guest was Rep. Renee Ellmers who discussed the defense of life. This was the most coverage by anyone in the media. Thank you, Judge Napolitano.

I then went to FOX News and I’ll admit, I was disappointed. The article was written by Shannon Bream and just like C-SPAN she called the protestors anti-abortion. Yes they are anti-abortion, but why doesn’t anyone ever call them pro-life? Why do they have to be constantly addressed as anti? When pro-choice protesters march they’re referred to as pro-choice, not anti-life. She did, however, give a reasonable estimate of people there, tens of thousands. Trust me, that’s much better than some of the others.

(more…)

It’s bad when national media outlets show bias, but I honestly think it’s worse when your local media shows bias. Last night on Twitter I came across a tweet about thousands at a pro-Walker rally, but the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel said only hundreds were there.

This may not seem like a big deal, but the Associated Press picked it up and didn’t bother to check the facts. Other media outlets reported the original AP article. The MacIver Institute took a screen shot and posted it to their Facebook account:

I looked all over the Associated Press website and couldn’t find their articles. Not shocked at all, but luckily other local outlets used the numerous AP articles on their site. The first one appeared on their ABC website. This article is interesting because it glosses over the pro-Walker protestors, but goes into detail about the anti-Walker protestors. No bias here, right? The AP did post another article that was picked up by Madison.com. This one did get into more detail about the rally and the supporters, including those who spoke. The only article I could find that is any good is from Wauwatosa Patch. The writer, Jim Price, uses accurate numbers. He mentions the organizers were expecting 1,000 people, but 3,000 attended.

I don’t know about you, but when I hear someone say over 1,000 I picture 1,200, maybe even 1,500. I definitely don’t picture 3,000! It doesn’t change the perspective much by updating the articles to say over 1,000 when they will be specific about the number of counter protestors. Matt Batzel, from the original tweet, told me this is unfair because it appears the pro-Walker protestors only outnumbered the anti-Walker protestors 10 to 1.

The local TV stations also repeated the numbers like TMJ-4 and WSAW. Now, the TMJ-4 article says thousands now, but if you look under the by line it will say it was updated. The video of the actual news broadcast shows they changed their mind. The broadcaster says hundreds instead of thousands. Luckily, the MacIver Institute also posted a video on YouTube.

(more…)

From Accuracy in Media’s Logan Churchwell:

With the first legitimate event of the 2012 Republican presidential primary just days away in Iowa, the Associated Press today offered a clear example of hatchet jobs to come for the candidates. Mitt Romney was given an early example of what the AP means by “journalism with voice.”

I previously raised concerns over a leaked memo from AP Managing Editor Mike Oreskes two weeks ago. Charging all journalists to use the said “voice,” he did not offer any examples but, rather very contradictory directions (emphasis added):

“We’re going to be pushing hard on journalism with voice, with context, with more interpretation. This does not mean that we’re sacrificing any of our deep commitment to unbiased, fair journalism. It does not mean that we’re venturing into opinion, either. It does mean that we need to be looking for ways to be more distinctive and stand out in the field — something our customers need and want. The why and the how of the news are as crucial as the who, what, when and where.”

The AP offered a very clear example this morning for how these directions will be executed.

The title, “Romney tries to come across as man of the people” was bad enough and it only got worse from there. The AP revealed its playbook as to how they will frame the Romney campaign in 2012.

Step 1: Paint Romney as filthy rich; like his daddy before him. What better way to fan the flames of class warfare than to paint the Republican frontrunner as the quintessential political aristocrat of one-percenter roots? The AP led with (emphasis added):

“Mitt Romney reminisced before a noontime crowd about the long car trips his family took when he was a boy. ‘My dad made Ramblers, so we had one,’ the Republican presidential hopeful said…In fact, Romney’s father didn’t just make cars. He was chairman and president of American Motors, the company that made Ramblers, and a highly successful businessman before he entered politics. It’s a detail the son omitted as he sought to establish a bond with Iowans he hopes will support him in next week’s presidential caucuses.”

Toward the end of the piece, another wealth jab that now opens the Romney wardrobe and Christmas list to criticism:

“As he stood at the cash register at a Concord, N.H., toy store, picking up a few gifts for charity, a patron asked him what he gave his family for Christmas. Earlier in the day, he had bought his wife a $285 North Face jacket as a gift, he said…For his sons? ‘We sent them checks,’ said Romney, a multimillionaire. ‘Cash is always good’.”

Some may remember just how effective the smears were against the Palin family wardrobe in 2008; a standard not held to Michelle Obama.

Step 2: Suggest to readers that either Romney is too smart, or Republicans are too dumb to understand him. Not only is Romney rich and therefore uncaring, but he cannot speak the language and empathize with the common man. The AP cited Romney’s comments regarding company relocation affecting employee commutes:

“Sometimes it’s counter-intuitive,’ replied Romney, a former businessman, explaining that businesses often invent new, more efficient ways to compete…The term is called productivity. Output per person,’ he said. ‘Our productivity equals our income’.”

Anyone with a Business 101 course under their belt or basic sense gained from commercial employment can understand what that statement means, and therefore why the question was properly answered. To argue otherwise is an insult to the general intelligence of the electorate. But the AP does not stop there, suggesting that he can also be too smart and systematically-minded to be “sympathetic.”

“When one retired firefighter in New Hampshire said he was drawing a reduced Social Security check because he also had a state pension, the former Massachusetts governor was less than sympathetic. ‘If there’s a competition for who will give you the most free stuff, go vote for that guy.’ When the man said he wasn’t asking for any handouts, Romney said, ‘You knew what you were getting into. … I wish you well, but I’m not going to promise you more bucks’.”

Regardless of the approach, Romney will be made to look unfit to chat up a voter on Main Street. It also would be helpful to know the context of that exchange and the tone of the question.

(more…)

One of the Old Media’s favorite ways of attempting to hide the ideological track of a story is to somehow forget to mention which party someone in the news hails or to whom they owe their fealty. In this case, it is what they don’t report that misleads. This week we find a classic what-they-don’t-say story concerning the judge that blocked sections of South Carolina’s new immigration law. For those unaware, U.S. District Judge Richard Gergel temporarily blocked segments of South Carolina’s new immigration laws because he claimed that some of its provisions impinged on federal prerogatives, things over which the state has no jurisdiction. The South Carolina law was opposed in court by Obama’s left-wing, activist Department of Justice headed by Eric “Fast And Furious” Holder and a gaggle of civil rights groups. Judge Gergel agreed with these attackers and issued an injunction to stop implementation of the provisions in question.

The Old Media reported a lot of details in the story, of course. We learned all about who opposed the provisions, who scoffed at the injunction, in what District Judge Gergel hailed, and in some of the reports we even get to hear what Republican South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley had to say about it all. But there is one thing few news outlets seemed to report that might help readers understand the decision better. Judge Richard Mark Gergel is an Obama appointee. (more…)

A story on horrific poverty oddly gives me hope for local TV news.

As a local TV news/sports anchor for almost 30 years, one of my biggest problems with the business was when young producers or reporters would cut-and-paste a story from the Associated Press and just report it as gospel. I’m sure there were times when I made this mistake as well, but there were also times when I would take information I knew was inaccurate and change it in the script or just change it “on the fly” on set. Then I would spend the next two hours in meetings having to explain why I did what I did. Usually, my answer went something like this, “If I’m the face of this story, I’m not going to report something I know is inaccurate just because the AP says it is.” I would win the battles with facts, but after a while stations prefer to have news anchors who just shut up and read (if that makes sense).

This brings me to the remarkable thing that KNBC in Los Angeles did this week. A recent AP story claimed that 1 in 2 people were poor or low-income. A startling number, certainly. KNBC just flat out said that those numbers may be way off.

“Those figures appear to be wrong, perhaps based on a misunderstanding of the data by journalists who did not go back to the source to doublecheck their figures, said analysts at the U.S. Census Bureau district office in Los Angeles.”

Kudos to KNBC for doing its homework, double-checking the numbers and not just cutting-and-pasting from the Associated Press. Of course, if KNBC is right, you’ve got to wonder why the AP got this so wrong and how many other local stations across the country just reported the story as they got it from the AP. Online that 50% number, that KNBC says is inaccurate, spread like wildfire.

(more…)

- RIP Chris Hitchens.

- Catfight! The claws are out for Chelsea at NBC.

The former first daughter is the focus of “intense jealousy” among the show’s female cor­respondents, including news veterans Ann Curry, Natalie Morales, Kate Snow and Mer­edith Vieira, sources say.

While the women are honored to work alongside anchorman Williams, legendary “Nightline” host Ted Koppel,former CBS newsman Harry Smith and NBC Sports anchor Bob Costas, “the daggers are out for Chelsea,” an insider told The ENQUIRER.

“Chelsea has been hired as a ‘special correspon­dent’ with no TV news experience whatsoever, and there’s the feeling that she didn’t pay her dues …

“Top network brass are giving Chelsea star treat­ment,” the insider divulged. “One woman groused, ‘If her last name wasn’t Clinton, she’d be Chelsea who? There are college interns here who have more TV experience than she does, but they’ll have to go out to a place like Cleveland for years before they’d even be considered for a network job in New York.’

“And another woman added, ‘When her mother Hillary was running for president in 2008, Chelsea refused to give inter­views to the media, and now she suddenly wants to be one of us!’

I know I titled this “catfight,” but it seems dismissive of valid criticisms to brush this off as regular chick fighting. Now, if the women reporters at NBC didn’t feel this way over the hiring of Luke Russert, then it’s apropos. It seems like legitimate concern over the lack of talent or experience of a reporter who got the job due to her last name.

(more…)

From Accuracy in Media’s Logan Churchwell:

An internal memo penned by the Associated Press’ Managing Editor Mike Oreskes was leaked and featured on sites such as The Huffington Post and Gawker this morning. As an effort to keep up with the rapidly changing news cycle, Oreskes is now offering a new direction for the wire service.

(Source: Moonbattery/Media Mania)

The new plan of action is called “The New Distinctiveness.” But why the change? The AP defines the problem:

“AP wins when news breaks, but after an hour or two we’re often replaced by a piece of content from someone else who has executed something more thoughtful or more innovative. Often it’s someone who has taken what we do (sometimes our reporting itself) and pushed it to the next level of content: journalism that’s more analytical, maybe a fresh and immediate entry point, a move away from text, a multimedia mashup or a different story form that speaks more directly to users.”

To face this challenge, Oreskes will be leading assignment editors and reporters to respond quicker, focus on story themes (dig deeper into the story), diversify communication methods and most important, report with “voice.”

This “reporting with voice” plank of the proposal should set off alarm bells. The full passage states (emphasis added):

“Journalism With Voice. We’re going to be pushing hard on journalism with voice, with context, with more interpretation. This does not mean that we’re sacrificing any of our deep commitment to unbiased, fair journalism. It does not mean that we’re venturing into opinion, either. It does mean that we need to be looking for ways to be more distinctive and stand out in the field — something our customers need and want. The why and the how of the news are as crucial as the who, what, when and where.”

The use of words like voice, context and interpretation are broad pathways to journalism with a point of view. Ask yourself, how does one report with “voice” while maintaining a “deep commitment to unbiased, fair journalism?” Will the AP weigh the use of “voice” on an ad hoc basis against fair reporting?

(more…)

Here’s The New York Times headline:

Justice Department Counters Claim That It Misled Congress in Gun Inquiry

Here’s the original AP headline the media outlets used, including MSNBC:

Justice Dept. details how it got statements wrong

The NYT headline makes it appear the DOJ admits absolutely no wrong doing. However, in the AP headline the DOJ admits they were wrong, but offer an explanation.

If Charlie Savage is going to write an original story he could at least use a headline that doesn’t dupe the readers? But the headline isn’t the only bad part of the article. The whole article is completely soft on the DOJ and the tone is off, almost as if Mr. Savage is unconcerned that this operation has taken the life of Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry and 200+ Mexican civilians. At least Pete Yost, author of the AP article, reported the facts of these emails, didn’t add in any of his opinions, and gave detailed information of the emails.

Here is a snippet of Mr. Savage’s description of the emails. [Bold my emphasis]

The letter, which rejected early accusations of wrongdoing in Fast and Furious, told lawmakers that the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives “makes every effort to interdict weapons that have been purchased illegally and prevent their transportation to Mexico.”

Officials now acknowledge that the claim was misleading.

Here is the snippet from Mr. Yost’s article (bold my emphasis):

In a letter last February to Charles Grassley, the ranking Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee, the Justice Department said that the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms had not sanctioned the sale of assault weapons to a straw purchaser and that the agency makes every effort to intercept weapons that have been purchased illegally. In Operation Fast and Furious, both statements turned out to be incorrect.

Mr. Savage says misleading and Mr. Yost says incorrect. Misleading could be technically true, but be presented in a way that would make you think the opposite. Incorrect means not correct, plain and simple. By using the word misleading Mr. Savage misleads his readers.

(more…)

Despite the fact the social media has eliminated the traditional media cycle, the Obama administration still thinks Friday afternoon document dumps will curtail reporting on what the documents entail. Our wonderful Department of Justice dumped over 1,000 pages with details on how they gave inaccurate information. The Associated Press broke the story at 6:16PM EST. Since then, Old Media has been slow reporting. I would usually give them a day, but I decided to check them out tonight. SHOCKER: The majority posted the AP story–NOT A SHOCKER: The majority buried it.

Before I start I need to give credit to Sharyl Attkisson of CBS News. Once again she shows what we need in the Old Media: She didn’t just copy and paste the AP article. She actually wrote an original piece on it. Thank you so much Mrs. Attkisson. (I also prefer her piece over the AP’s article.)

It’s honestly sad I am not shocked The New York Times didn’t have it anywhere on their website. I searched “Justice Department” and “Eric Holder” and there were no results for the document dump. Not one single word. [Update: New York Times published a piece on this Friday night around 9:30 pm EST several hours after this post published.]

The other media outlets (ABC, NBC, MSNBC, The Washington Post, Huffington Post) did copy and paste the AP story, but there is one major problem: you have to search for the story. It’s not on the front page. I couldn’t find it under US, National, Politics sections. Instead I went to the search box and punched in “Justice Department” and the first hit was the AP article.

I also need to note AP got an important fact wrong. Brian Terry was NOT a customs agent. He was a Border Patrol Agent.

(more…)

You couldn’t pay me to go to journalism school, but I imagine they spend considerable time talking about the importance of headlines. Most readers, myself included, simply don’t read much past the headline unless they have a personal interest in a story… or are stuck in a doctor’s office. So, often, the headline is the story or, at least, the story the news outfit wants you to take away.

So, I was struck today to see different news agencies, within minutes of each other, reporting very conflicting news on the same set of facts. First the AP headline:

October durable goods orders fell 0.7 percent

Now, check out the Reuters headline for the very same report:

Durable goods orders ex-transportation up in October

Of course, the Reuters headline is no doubt completely true, but how is excluding a major sector of the economy remotely helpful to readers? Is Reuters now just going to report the bits of the news it likes and ignore the inconvenient bits. It reminds me of the classic Marion Barry line addressing rampant crime in DC:

Outside of the killings, Washington has one of the lowest crime rates in the country.

(more…)

Yesterday, in an article titled “Mo. crackdown on taping lectures shows digital divide over academic freedom, student privacy,” the Associated Press falsely claimed that Big Government edited controversial footage of a University of Missouri labor studies course. From the article:

Conservative blogger Andrew Breitbart’s Big Government website obtained a leaked copy and edited hours of classroom lectures to suggest that she and a classroom colleague advocated union violence.

Neither Breitbart, nor Big Government, nor any of the Breitbart editors edited the footage in question.

In fact, Insurgent Visuals claimed publicly that they edited the classroom videos after they were posted online and leaked. (more…)

Occupy Wall Street’s imploding, Obama and the Democrats own the chaos, and now the AP is panicking.

 But first a little context…

Something happened this month that the mainstream media and the Left (but I repeat myself) never expected. Two months ago, the White House, Democrats, and the MSM were all sure that the #OccupyWallStreet movement would save them in 2012. With thousands of astro-turfed morons in the streets raging against Wall Street, Obama’s allies hoped to use said morons to create a silver lining in the economic cloud he himself created. 

The plan was a simple one. The path to Obama’s second term requires that enough voters forget that our current economic woes are the fault of a failed President who enjoyed two years of having every single item on his wish-list passed by Congress. And so the idea was to create Occupy in order to give the MSM the cover they desired to spend every single day up until the election talking about greed and income inequality in order to blame both for the stagnant economy.

The hope was that by repeating this message incessantly, enough voters could be convinced that Wall Street, and by extension, evil Republicans, were to blame for our chronic unemployment, record deficits, and stillborn economic growth. President Obama who?

Fortunately for America, this plan has not only failed miserably it has backfired completely. Thanks to the rise of New Media and our unwillingness to let the MSM’s lies, bias, and cover ups stand for even one more day, Occupy is in its death throes and might take the President and Democratic party down with it. First and foremost, we uncovered the lie that Occupy was grassroots and then we exposed every Occupy rape, poop, death, overdoese, old woman thrown down the stairs, attack on a police officer, and public act of masturbation. In the process, public opinion turned against the Occupiers and as a result these Leftists have started doing what the Left always does when they lose, have a tantrum.

(more…)

- Is Wikileaks fading?

But many others were wondering if it was one more indication that the WikiLeaks movement, which changed the face of journalism and the entire informational ecosystem, could be in doubt as well. Although stateless and seemingly beyond the reach of the law and its enemies, WikiLeaks was, from the beginning, subject to a number of internal frailties and external vulnerabilities. The fact that WikiLeaks came to be embodied in a single individual, especially one as mercurial as Mr. Assange, was chief among them. Internal battles led to the departure of a number of key programmers. Large, corporate enablers of online payments, including PayPal, MasterCard, Visa, Western Union and Bank of America, declined to process donations, all but cutting off the organization from its funding base.

- LOL files: Former Newsweek editor says they didn’t run the Clinton-Lewinsky affair because they were afraid it would hurt the publication’s reputation. Good to know they’ve since (d)evolved beyond that standard now.

Former Newsweek editor Mark Whitaker said Sunday he chose not to run the story that former President Bill Clinton had an affair with Monica Lewinsky because he and his staff didn’t feel they were on firm enough ground.

“If we had gotten that wrong,” Whitaker told CNN’s Howard Kurtz on Reliable Sources, it “could  have been a mortal blow to Newsweek’s reputation”

(more…)

Within hours of the news, the AP reported “Gadhafi’s Death Clears Way for Oil Exports,” gleefully explaining that Gadhafi’s death will result in lower oil prices the world over!  Energy crisis is solved!  Recession ended!

Remember the Left’s incessant ”No Blood for Oil“ smear against President Bush for the ”illegitimate” wars in Iraq?  According to the Left, and rarely challenged by the Make-Believe Media, Bush’s war in the Middle east was only about getting oil.

But it’s now 2011, not 2003.  There’s a new sheriff in town.  Apparently, blood for oil is a good thing now.   The radical leftwing media source The Guardian only reports how Obama has ”chalked up Libya as another foreign policy success to place alongside the killing in May of al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden” and, more ominously, that Gadhafi’s bloody assassination signals a “prescription” for actions against other Middle East countries including Syria.  Syrian President Assad may be wondering if he’s on the White House Secret Assassination List. No mention of blood-for-oil. No mention of illegal regime change.

(more…)

So here you have some public official caught on film casually using the word “nigger” to describe black children, he’s forced to resign as county commissioner, and this is all the information the Associated Press passes along:

WEDOWEE, Alabama — A county commissioner from east Alabama has resigned after being videotaped using a racial slur to describe black children.

Birmingham television station WBRC reports that longtime Randolph County Commissioner Thomas “June” Waldrep submitted his resignation on Tuesday. In a letter, the 80-year-old Waldrop apologized for anything he said that was offensive.

A video posted on Youtube shows Waldrep repeatedly using a racial slur to refer to black children attending a Boys and Girls Club. Waldrep doesn’t seem to know he is being recorded in the video.

In his resignation, Waldrep says he hopes his actions through the years spoke louder than his words.

Gee, isn’t something missing?

And it’s not a fluke, either, because you can read various versions of the story here, here, and here and there’s still a little something missing. In fact, after a good faith search on my part, this something that’s missing couldn’t be found in any news story on the Web. We had to confirm Waldrep was a Democrat through a Lexis/Nexis search.

(more…)

From the AP:

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Barack Obama’s promise Thursday that everything in his jobs plan will be paid for rests on highly iffy propositions.

It will only be paid for if a committee he can’t control does his bidding, if Congress puts that into law and if leaders in the future – the ones who will feel the fiscal pinch of his proposals – don’t roll it back.

(more…)

In a recent article on the dissatisfaction of Big Labor once again see the Associated Press weaving bias and left-wing “definitions into what is otherwise an everyday news story.

Even while presenting straight “news” the AP can’t resist swinging all terms and discussions to the liberal side of the fence, a tactic that it employs to push every story to the left.

In an article headlined, “Labor Unions Adjust to New Reality Under Obama,” AP writer Sam Hannanel reports the dissatisfaction that Big Labor leaders are increasingly expressing about their Obammessiah. Even though he’s been the most union-friendly president in American history their grumbling is rising as they see Obama “failing” them.

The complaint is that Obama hasn’t done enough for unions — an astounding claim for what he has done for them in comparison to what past presidents have done.

One can almost understand Big Labor’s lament, truthfully. After all, Obama ran as a red-fisted, union-pushing, socialist extremist when he campaigned with unionistas throughout the 2008 campaign. They certainly expected Obama to act Chavez-like assuming the sort of dictatorial powers that one would need to push the union’s agenda.

While he has done more than any other president to implement Big Labor’s agenda he hasn’t been able to defeat the voter’s concerns that that agenda is detrimental to any hope of economic recovery and certain political realities have prevented el Presidente Obama’s grand reordering of things in the union’s favor.

(more…)

The Associated Press was, at one point, considered a reputable news source. Founded in 1846, its “news” articles and photographs are published in 1700 newspapers and used by thousands more television and radio broadcasters. There have been some controversies in its long history, most of which were in the last decade, but it is still considered by many to be an impartial news source.

It’s not. It hasn’t been for a while. For years, it has been slanting news stories against the right, against America and against Israel. It has done this subtly in many cases. However, when it comes to the Middle East, the organization no longer seems to care about even the appearance of impartiality.

Following Binyamin Netanyahu’s speech to both houses of Congress, the “news” organization published a Fact-Check of the speech. When they say “fact check,” they really mean “blatant attack and distortion of facts as well as misrepresentation of what was said in the first place.”

The author of the hit piece, Josef Federman attempts to take cherry picked quotes and then refute them.

(more…)