MRC's Graham Whines That Its Attacks On 'Liberal Media' Are Considered 'Bad Faith' Topic: Media Research Center
The Media Research Center has long beem afraid of criticism of its work -- particularly that they're a bunch of partisan hacks who care more about scoring political points than contributing to journalism. They're especially sensitive to the argument that they're bad-faith critics.
MRC executive Tim Graham complained in his June 4 column about how CNN's Brian Stelter believes right-wingers like Graham will respond to the idea that the news media should receive government subsidies:
As for critics? Stelter writes: "Billions in funding for local news?! I can hear the bad-faith mockery on Fox News at the same time I type these words." Stelter is so unsubtle that every conservative critique of the liberal media is a "bad-faith mockery."
One problem, say the liberals, is "less local news meant more polarization" in communities. But anyone can see that hot issues like transgender "girls" in school sports or teaching "critical race theory" are inherently polarizing on a local level, and, in each case, the left sees only one "civic" opinion worth hearing. The other should be discouraged if not crushed.
Does anyone think Stelter's CNN demonstrates a concern about "polarization" in its national product? Does it offer conservatives a "good-faith" platform for discussion?
Ah, but conservative media criticism is done in bad faith, because its goal is to demonize and destroy, not improve. Can Graham argue with a straight face that every single criticism the MRC has made in the past three decades lacked partisan intent, that it wasn't done to brand the media as "liberal" in order to advance a political narrative? Of course he can't -- he knows what his employer is all about.
(Also, it's quite rich to hear Graham rant about evil government subsidies when the MRC sought and received as much as $2 million in pandemic relief money last year.)
So irked by Stelter's statement that Graham spent his June 16 column ranting about being accused of bad-faith criticism:
The arrogance of the liberal media can be measured by their dismissal of all conservative criticism as "bad faith" attacks on the press. Assuming that conservative critics are dishonest and disreputable cynics is a common trope of CNN's Brian Stelter when liberal journalists become mired in scandal.
In a June 15 "Academic Minute" podcast, Marist College professor Kevin Lerner explicitly defined the entire conservative movement as bad-faith media critics.
"These bad-faith attacks on the press began to rise most recently in the 1960s and '70s, led by a concerted effort among conservative journalists and critics," Lerner argued. "Along with efforts to create a conservative counterbalance to the mainstream press, they engaged in attempts to delegitimize legacy news organizations by painting them as irredeemably biased. This strain of bad-faith criticism is alive and well today."
"Good-faith" criticism, he insisted, is "based on the premise that a strong, independent press, responsive to the needs of an engaged citizenry, is essential to the functioning of a democratic society."
There are several obvious flaws in this argument.
First, conservatives don't see "legacy news organizations" as "independent." They are not watchdogs of both parties. They are savage destroyers of one party and cuddly defenders of the other. They are not "responsive to the needs" of all citizens but to the political needs of one party. This argument is somehow in "bad faith," regardless of the evidence.
Second, conservatives dare to argue that the "press" is not synonymous with the "mainstream press." Lerner's side always implies that there is not a liberal media and conservative media, but a mainstream media and an extreme media.
Third, criticizing liberal news organizations is part of the "functioning of a democratic society." We want a vibrant press, but media criticism is not anti-democracy. It defines democracy. Liberals like Lerner believe that democracy functions best when "legacy media" never lose public trust, no matter what kind of partisan hackery they foist on the public.
Notice that Graham cites criticism of onbly "liberal news organizations" as essential -- he does not see criticism of, say, Fox News as valid. And given that the MRC is dedicated to the destruction of media that doesn't act like Fox News, it's entirely fair to assume that Graham and his boss, Brent Bozell, have no interest in maintaining "a strong, independent press, responsive to the needs of an engaged citizenry."
And as much as Graham gets paid to lash out at the "liberal media," it's clear that he believes there is no such thing as "conservative media" -- not even the MRC's own "news" division, CNSNews.com, which has an unmistakable right-wing bias and refuses to publish any columnists who aren't conservative.
Graham, by the way, will not hold Fox News responsible for even the most egregious issues of bias and ethics. So unbothered was he by Bill O'Reilly's history of sexual harassment that he appeared on the final episode of what was his show on Fox News and didn't mention O'Reilly's sleaze at all.
Graham and the MRC attacks the "liberal media" for things it would never dream of criticizing Fox News for (lest it jeopardize future appearances on the channel). That's the essence of bad-faith criticism.
Meanwhile, in neither of those columns does Graham made a coherent argument that the MRC's attacks on "liberal media" -- funded by millions of dollars in nonprofit money every year -- are done in good faith and only the best of intentions. That's because he can't.
Newsmax Columnist Likens Trump To John The Baptist Topic: Newsmax
Until today thugs like Antonio Gramsci and Saul Alinsky and so many have invaded schools and colleges with a dark program to undermine the American legacy whoring word games like original sin and systemic racism, designed to shift power to them!
On the contrary, The Trump Phenomenon was more significant than the left or right or even the conservatives and RINOs (Republicans in Name Only). RINOs were the same old Establishment first enriching themselves.
Trump, as I explain in my new book, "Citizen Trump," is not a Jesus but more like a John the Baptist. We don't like him eating locusts and lives in the desert, but to paraphrase Jesus, "what did you expect a reed tossed by the sea?" So you ask him to do the dirty work but complain it got dirty?
The Far Left (not traditional liberals) has forfeited its place in our free society and shown its true colors. They have become cancer in the political body in need of severe radiation treatments.
Cancer has created slow leprosy for the innocent and creeping blindness in our children.
Jesus spoke in metaphors and parables. John the Baptist called his greatest enemies whitewashed sepulchers — in other words, phonies, frauds and fakes!
Yes, Trump performed his role as candidate and president; that's why he succeeded but just ran out of TV time.
Forget heaven. You're in a white noise reality.
Winning an election is one battle, but winning back your country from the media's control is all-out war!
WND's Zumwalt Tries 'Manchurian Candidate' Smear Against Biden Topic: WorldNetDaily
WorldNetDaily particularly loved to smear President Obama with the "Manchurian candidate" tag -- so much, in fact, that then-reporter Aaron Klein wrote an entire book about Obama called "The Manchurian President." WND columnist tried that smear against President Biden in a June 16 column praising Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin for standing in the way of Biden White House initiatives:
As a man of great political courage looking to impact such change and encourage more bipartisan discussion, it seems Manchin could play a much more effective role simply by surrendering his Democratic Party credentials and declaring himself an Independent. The move would cause those Senate Democrats lacking the courage to voice their own concerns about their party's sharp turn to the left to realize it is time to speak up and work with their Republican counterparts in the best interests of the people.
Biden's leftist actions since taking office raise concerns he is giving reality to the concept of the "Manchurian Candidate" – the politician whose disloyalty to country is influenced by others harboring undemocratic intentions. In Biden's rush to socialism, assisted by a Senate under Democratic Party control, it is comforting to know a "Manchinian Candidate" – a politician loyal to the republic established by our Founding Fathers – stands in his way of implementing such an agenda.
Zumwalt, of course, offers no evidence to back up his claim that Biden's a "Manchurian candidate."
Zumwalt also praised John McCain for his bipartisan approach that enabled him "to walk a bipartisan political tightrope for 31 years until his 2018 death," further touting Manchin as "the Democratic Party's equivalent to John McCain." But Zumwalt seems to have forgotten that McCain himself was smeared as a "Manchurian candidate" but right-wingers who didn't like his bipartisanship. Ironic, eh?
CNS Echoes MRC Parent With LGBT Freakouts Over Plastic Bricks, Cereal Topic: CNSNews.com
The Media Research Center's "news" division, CNSNews.com, parroted its parent in having an anti-LGBT freakout over plastic bricks and cereal. Craig Bannister complained in a May 20 article:
On Thursday, the LEGO Group announced that its new LGBTQIA+ set “goes on sale on June 1, to mark the start of Pride Month.”
“Inspired by the iconic rainbow flag,” the 346-piece set “features 11 monochrome minifigures each with its own individual hairstyle and rainbow colour” LEGO says in an announcementtouting the new product.
“I wanted to create a model that symbolises inclusivity and celebrates everyone, no matter how they identify or who they love,” set designer and Vice President of Design Matthew Ashton said, adding that the set is also a celebration of the LGBTQIA+ community within the LEGO Group and amongst the brand’s adult fans.
Each of the LEGO characters was designed to be gender-neutral, so it’s up to the builder to assign the gender of every character, Ashton says in LEGO’s promo video:
This was followed by a June 1 commentary by Monica Cole of One Million Moms, who brought the homophobic hate (and shilled for her petition):
Lego is confusing our innocent children by attempting to normalize this lifestyle choice, which is not only irresponsible but also dangerous to the well-being of our children. Toy manufacturers need to remain neutral and should avoid aiming to please a small percentage of customers while pushing away conservative customers.
It is crystal clear that Lego is attempting to desensitize our youth, so my group, One Million Moms, believes it’s urgent to warn parents of the company’s agenda.
We must remain diligent and stand up for biblical values and truth. Scripture says multiple times that homosexuality is wrong, and God will not tolerate this sinful nature.
Sign our petition urging Lego to stop the release of its “Everyone is Awesome” rainbow LGBTQ building set immediately.
Meanwhile, Susan Jones was CNS' designated lasher-outer at cereal in a May 27 article:
Would you like a little milk with your cereal? Or do you prefer a heaping helping of liberal activism?
Now available on grocer shelves -- Kellogg's limited edition "Together With Pride" cereal, a collaboration between the cereal-maker and GLAAD, an LGBTQ+ advocacy group.
"Our delicious new recipe features berry-flavored, rainbow hearts dusted with edible glitter," said Kellogg General Manager Doug VanDeVelde. "We can't wait for fans to try our latest limited run."
The outreach effort includes "correct" pronouns:
"Kellogg is not only building on an ongoing commitment to support the LGBTQ+ community, but initiatives that spotlight the importance of using correct pronouns to create safe and welcoming spaces for trans and nonbinary people," Ellis said.
"Together With Pride" cereal follows Kellogg's earlier collaboration with GLAAD to produce "All Together" cereal, which was available only online for a limited time.
Jones also added a list of other products Kellogg's makes, presumably as a way to help would-be boycotting homophobes like One Million Moms.
Another MRC Anti-LGBT Freakout, 'Gay, Inc.' Edition Topic: Media Research Center
One thing Media Research Center writer Elise Ehrhard lovesto do is blame any non-hateful depiction of LGBT characters on TV as the work of "Gay, Inc." She never really explains what that is -- all the better to make it sound as nefarious as possible, even though it's clear she works for "Anti-Gay, Inc." -- the notoriously homophobic MRC. Now Ehrhard is complaining about a show being a "Gay, Inc." despite lacking much in the way of actual gay content. She complained in a May 3 post:
Do you have no desire for homosexual sex, but really think your same sex best friend is amazing? Do you wish you could be called anything but "straight"? Gay Inc. is here to save the day!
Freeform's Everything's Gonna Be Okay introduced a Gay Inc. term for what used to be called "Best Friends Forever."
In the episode, "California Banana Slugs," on April 29, Drea (Lillian Carrier), the best friend of main character Matilda (Kayla Cromer), announces that she identifies as a "homo-romantic asexual". What on earth is that, you ask? Let me explain. But first, a little background.
You see, Drea and Matilda have been friends for years. In fact, at the end of their senior year of high school they liked each other so much they tried to be lesbians. (At first, they tried a threesome with a fellow student, but the guy ran away before it began.)
Now that they have graduated and entered adulthood, they realize they are not lesbians and have no sexual attraction to each other whatsoever. In fact, they find intercourse with the same sex icky. Matilda decides she wants to have casual sexual intercourse with men. Drea decides she is just not feeling it for anybody. But they both agree to still call each other "girlfriend" which is something many female friends do anyway.
Nobody told Drea that the entire history of same-sex friendship, in both real life and fiction, from the Gospel of John to the Lord of the Ring's Sam and Frodo, has involved intense bonds of love that someone could erroneously label as "romantic." Of course, in order to define it as romantic you would have to be immersed in a homosexual culture that eroticizes or romanticizes everything.
And that is exactly what the LGBTQUIABCDEFG world has done. With a new magic trick, Gay Inc. has now found a term to bring even straight people into its tent. You have to give Big Gay credit. They never cease to find ways to convince young people they are really somehow, some way, kinda sorta gay.
Or, maybe, people would like the space to figure out exactly what their relationship is with each other without hateful moral scolds like Ehrhard denigrating and mocking them every step of the way.
Ehrhard returned for more scolding and denigration (and more blaming of "Gay, Inc.") in a June 6 post after the episode in which these characters formalized their relationship:
Make way for the first television wedding between platonic same-sex best friends.
Last month, the Freeform show, Everything's Gonna Be Okay, introduced the first "homo-romantic asexual character," the latest iteration in LGBTQIA "identities." Basically, it is someone who has no sexual attraction to anyone, but really likes a best friend of the same sex. Gay, Inc. will create an identity foranything nowadays.
Believe it or not, this same-sex "best friend marriage" insanity is now being promoted by the left. The New York Times, a newspaper of emotionally immature writers that regularly pushes stupid ideas about marriage and relationships, recently published an article titled "From Best Friends to Platonic Spouses=." "Some people are taking their friendships to the next level by saying 'I do' to marriages without sex," the subheading announced. Actually, only lonely people living in an atomized society who no longer recognize the nature of either friendship or marriage would do any such thing.
And Hollywood needs to stop pushing these confused LGBTQIA narratives rooted in unhealed trauma or loneliness. There really are people in the world who know how to separate platonic friendships from marriage. There are also people who know how to create healthy, enduring families rooted in the monogamous love of a husband and wife.
Unfortunately, G.L.A.A.D. signs-off on most Hollywood scripts nowadays and is the arbiter of an increasingly extreme Gay, Inc. agenda. Therefore, these ludicrous storylines will only increase. And as they do, Americans will increasingly tune them out.
Is it emotionally mature for Ehrhard to obsess about the sex lives (or not) between fictional characters? Hard to say. Is sneering at and denigrating relationships that aren't floridly heterosexual a stupid idea? Perhaps. Is it "extreme" for LGBT people to not want to be hated and for media depictions of them to not be universally negative? Ehrhard seems to think so.
Perhaps Ehrhard needs to spend a little more time deconstruting her fictitious "Gay, Inc." and stop whining so much -- especially since "Anti-Gay, Inc." will pay her handsomely to noodle around like that.
NEW ARTICLE -- CNS' COVID Coverage: Biden-Bashing and Reverse Mask-Shaming Topic: CNSNews.com
CNSNews.com has switched from downplaying coronavirus deaths under Trump to playing mask gotcha with the Biden administration. Read more >>
Clinton Derangement Syndrome Continues At The MRC Topic: Media Research Center
Bill Clinton hasn't been president for more than 20 years, but that's not keeping the Media Research Center from continuing to have meltdowns every time he appears on TV. Which brings us to a June 7 post by Scott Whitlock:
Given that a former Bill Clinton operative, George Stephanopoulos, is a co-host of Good Morning America, it’s no surprise that the morning show asked the controversial Democrat zero tough questions. But even for ABC, this was insane. Co-host Michael Strahan offered no follow-up when Clinton fantasized about being president for life.
Strahan offered this softball: “Do you miss being president?” The man who exemplified Me Too before the term existed, rhapsodized, “The real answer is I loved being president.” He offered his bizarre admission: “I loved the job. It's a good thing we had a two-term limit or I would have forced the American people to defeat me or take me out in a pine box.”
No follow-up from Strahan. Instead, the co-host acted as a stenographer for the Democrat, touting the new novel he has written with James Patterson: “The President and Patterson wrote their latest thriller over the course of the pandemic, using their time in quarantine for some self-reflection.”
What was the self reflection? Was it about his treatment of Monica Lewinsky or the numerous other women who have accused him of sexual harassment or abuse? Strahan didn't ask.
Once again, liberal journalists don’t really care about Me Too abuses, so long as a Democrat is involved.
WND's Cashill Sides With More Of The Worst People Topic: WorldNetDaily
WorldNetDaily columnist Jack Cashill remainsdetermined to stay on the wrong side of history by choosing to defend, um, certain people.
In his May 26 column, Cashill complained that attorney Benjamin Crump "cleverly framed George Zimmerman in the 2012 Florida death of Trayvon Martin" -- never mind that nobody has ever disputed that Zimmerman killed Martin. Cashill went on to rant that "Crump flagrantly corrupted the most racially charged trial since O.J. Simpson's," repeating the uncorroborated claim from charlatan filmmaker Joel Gilbert that a witness on behalf of Martin was an imposter. He then complained that Gilbert's film got no tractiion in right-wing media:
Having no vested interest in the success of Gilbert's film, I persuaded Gilbert that I could make a more objective case to the media, especially in Florida, than he could. So I tried.
I should have recorded the conversations. They would have dashed any hope anyone might have that the mainstream media can be reformed. The fear I encountered, often covered by hostility, was palpable.
I wish I could say the higher-level conservative media filled the void, but I cannot. From what I can tell, they are just as frightened as Big Media, maybe more so.
So the story of the greatest judicial fraud of the last half-century remains unknown to the vast majority of the American people. And if the president knows, as Crump might say, he ain't tellin'.
Cashill is lying about having "no vested interest in the success of Gilbert's film" -- he said himself he served as a consultant on the film and he heavily promoted it upon its release, as well as having written a book lionizing Zimmerman as a martyr and martin as a scary black thug in training, a narrative Gilbert's film reinforces. He's also delusional if he thought he could "make a more objective case" about the film; Gilbert's sleazy reputation precedes him, and there's no real way to overcome that, and Cashill would have to stay in serious denial of that in order to attempt to make that case. Not to mention Cashill's own reputation as a conspiracy-mongerer, making it even less likely anyone would consider anything he says as "objective."
In his June 2 column, Cashill took the side of a creepy cult leader:
"Some injustices are so heinous, so horrific, so grievous they can't be buried no matter how hard people try," said President Joe Biden in Tulsa on Tuesday.
Biden knows something about burying injustice. On April 19, 1993, he was serving on the Senate Judiciary Committee when a Democrat-controlled, FBI-led tank assault on the Mount Carmel religious community outside of Waco, Texas, left 74 people dead, more than half of them racial minorities.
As chairman of the Judiciary Committee, Biden had the responsibility to redress the injustice that took place at Waco. He passed on that responsibility.
Of the 74 killed that day, six were Hispanic. Six were of Asian descent. And 27 were black. The victims ranged in age from 6 to 61. And no, this is not something I read on the internet. I found a verifiable list of the dead, broken out by age and ethnicity, and counted them.
Truth be told, Waco represented the single greatest federally orchestrated one-day slaughter of racial minorities on American soil since Wounded Knee in 1890, and there, at least, the Indians fought back, killing more than 30 American cavalry.
Cashill gives only a single, end-of-column mention of the person who led that group, David Koresh, who was a cult leader whom people who grew up in the compound said he molested them as children -- and to whom his followers, regardless of ethnicity, were so in thrall they apparently didn't have the common sense to flee a burning building.
MRC Downplays 'Bachelor' Host's Missteps To Claim He's A Victim Of 'Woke Mob' Topic: Media Research Center
The last time we checked on the Media Research Center's weird fixation on "The Bachelor," Curtis Houck was sympathizing with contestant Rachel Kirkconnell over the exposure of her racially charged past (and support for QAnon) and with host Chris Harrison for making the mistake of rushing to Kirkconnell's defense before knowing the full story.
When Chris Harrison officially left the show after the incident, Houck went on a June 11 tirade agains the "woke mob" that supposedly got him fired:
On Tuesday, ABC and Warner Brothers Television announced that it had officially cut ties with Chris Harrison, the longtime host of ABC’s The Bachelor and The Bachelorette following a truly childish and pathetic act of cancel culture.
However, Harrison may have had the last laugh thanks to numerous reports revealing that he demanded (and fetched) an eight-figure buyout or risk Harrison exhuming any and all bodies the franchise, network, and production company had buried.
To recap, Harrison found himself being burned at the stake by the woke mob in February when he insisted on there be grace for Bachelor contestant Rachael Kirkconnell when it was discovered that, among other sins, attended an antebellum-themed party in college. And because he said these things to an incensed Rachel Lindsey on Extra (who was the first Black Bachelorette), Harrison had to go.
Worse yet, he spoke out against the “woke police” that seemed hellbent on permanently ruining Kirkconnell’s life. And when the mob wants to make someone miserable, they’ll stop at nothing to do so.
Along the way, Harrison provided a textbook example of how the cancel culture mob will never be satisfied and thus anything from genuine apologies to public self-flagellation will remain a waste of time.
Note that Houck dishonestly, um, whitewashed Kirkconnell's offenses to mention only the most benign one, censoring that she also allegedly bullied girls in high school for liking black men and spread far-right QAnon memes on social media. Also it's quite rich that Houck bashed the "woke mob" for "cancel culture" and "never be satisfied and thus anything from genuine apologies to public self-flagellation will remain a waste of time" -- because those are the exact same tactics he and his MRC co-workers use against anyone in the "liberal media" who doesn't sound or behave like they're working for Fox News or OAN. It has never treated, say, Dan Rather or Brian Williams with the same spirit of forgiveness that Houck is demandingfrom everyone regarding Harrison. In other words, they actually are the "woke mob" they pretend to warn others about.
Houck also expressed glee that Harrison got an eight-figure payout to kee quiet about "the motherload of dirt" he supposedly had on the show and was "willing to dish as a final screw-you to the mob unless they ponied up to meet his demands." So Harrison is getting well paid to go away, so he doesn't really need anyone's sympathy.
A few days later, Houck found a weird thing to be proud of in the new season of "The Bachelorette," while still not able to let go of the past:
ABC’s Bachelor and Bachelorette franchises have been in the headlines quite a bit as of late as the woke mob had decided to infiltrate one of reality TV’s earliest shows, turning what’s already a dumpster fire of drama and adding a side of wokeism.
But on Monday’s Bachelorette, conservatives achieved a small victory when contestant Mike Planeta revealed his virginity during a group date that challenged each guy to be “sex-positive” in a skit meant to woo lead Katie Thurston and, despite Thurston’s outspokenness on sex, gave him first place for the date.
So the "woke mob" "infiltrated" the show and forced Kirkconnell to do stupidly racist stuff?That's a bizarre interpretation of what happened.
Meanwhile, the MRC's homophobic wing weighed in on another show-related issue. Take it away, Veronica Hays:
Queerness is so en vogue at the moment! So trendy and cool — now a former Bachelor is cashing in and coming out. Wednesday on ABC's Good Morning America, former Bachelor Colton Underwood did just that. Of course, the public will be dying to know every ounce of detail regarding his incredible story of self-realization. Fortunately for the culture, Netflix will be providing just what the world so desperately needs, a new reality series starring Underwood, the latest gay man.
And predictably, GMA co-host Robin Roberts treaded lightly in all-but ignoring Underwood's creeper and stalker-like behavior toward now-ex-girlfriend Cassie Randolph.
Underwood sent shockwaves when he came out as gay to Roberts, who's a lesbian: “I’ve ran from myself for a long time. I’ve hated myself for a long time, and I’m gay. I came to terms with that earlier this year and have been processing it and the next step in all of this was sort of letting people know. Still nervous but, yeah, it's been a journey for sure.”
Would Hays be bringing up Underwood's alleged "creeper and stalker-like behavior" if he hadn't come out? Doubtful. And Hays is especially hateful and ignorant if she thinks people reveal who they are sexually only because of the possibility of "cashing in."
Hays completed her screed by huffing, "Unfortunately, the time when The Bachelor features an out member of the LGBTQ community may not be far off." Um, so what? It's on her that she hates LGBT people much that this possibility squicks her out so much.
CNS' Hot Pestering Intern Summer, Round 1 Topic: CNSNews.com
It's summer intern time again, and CNSNews.com is doing what it usually does: sending those interns to the Capitol to pester members of Congress with gotcha questions designed to feed right-wing narratives. This year's first round of gotcha questions centered on the federal budget, with a two-part question:
“President Biden has presented Congress with a budget that proposes running $14.5 trillion in deficits over the next decade. Will Congress ever balance the budget?”
"What year will Congress balance the budget?"
Articles detailing the answer included this biased boilerplate:
Under Biden's budget proposal, the federal government will continue to deficit spend (accumulate debt) for at least the next 10 years, with total borrowing hitting a combined $14.5 trillion in 2031.
The New York Times has reported, "President Biden would like the federal government to spend $6 trillion in the 2022 fiscal year, and for total spending to rise to $8.2 trillion by 2031. That would take the United States to its highest sustained levels of federal spending since World War II, while running deficits above $1.3 trillion through the next decade." (Emphasis added.)
Of course, this is all a biased partisan exercise, designed to give Republicans a platform to virtue-signal on the evils of budget deficits and to shame Democrats for realistically noting that ending federal deficits isn't like flipping a switch and that taxes may need to be raised. Helpfully, Craig Bannister pointed this out in a June 16 summary:
Generally, Republicans said that the U.S. definitely should balance its budget, but they were less certain about when that might happen.
Democrats – such as Senators Dianne Feinstein, Elizabeth Warren and Mark Kelly – said it would take more tax revenue to balance the budget. Others tended to be more skeptical, with some saying the budget will never be balanced and others saying that, if it ever is, it won’t be balanced any time soon.
Needless to say, none of these articles mentioned the role of a Republican president and a Republican-controlled Senate in running up deficits in the previous four years.
MRC Lashes Out At Taylor Swift (Again) For Not Hating LGBT People Topic: Media Research Center
The Media Research Center likes to make a big show about supporting "free speech," but it just can't handle it when Taylor Swift exercises her First Amendment rights -- particularly when she uses that right to not hate LGBT people. Abigail Streetman is the latest in a long line of MRC writers melting down over Swift saying something, in a June 2 post:
On June 1, the first day of “Pride Month,” Taylor Swift announced that the next brave step in her journey as a left-wing propagandist is to join GLAAD in it’s #summerofequality. Of course, this is just another phrase to describe the ongoing efforts of the Democrats to force the Equality Act through the Senate. How courageous of Swift to use her voice to support every other Hollywood celebrity who has been screeching about H.R. 5 for the past several months.
GLAAD is the speech police for all things gay, and it spends a lot of time demanding that gays and the rest of the alphabet be outrageously over-represented on TV and in movies. One of its recent projects includes a documentary on transgender athletes that seeks to demonize conservative politicians who don’t support males being permitted to participate in female sports.
Of course, Streetman is the one who is acting as speech police, lashing out at Swift for saying something. Or, as Streetman snidely put it: "Swift tweeted how “proud” she is to be joining GLAAD. Someone should ask her how comfortable she would be in a private restroom with a full grown male who’s pretending to be a woman." That's not how transgenderism works, but Streetmen advancing a narrative, not telling the truth.
Streetman concluded with a homophobic screed against the H.R.5:
Calling this insane piece of legislation the “Equality Act” is just the left manipulating emotions and obfuscating its true aims. How are we supposed to protect our First Amendment right to freedom of religion if citizens are forced to accept beliefs that go against their morals? Not only is it unconstitutional but it also flies in the face of the science that leftists have been telling us to trust.
There are only two genders, and biology agrees with that.
And we can all agree that Streetman is pushing an agenda rather than engaging in any sort of reasoned discussion.
WND Brings Back Pro-Trump Fabulist To Bash Democrats Topic: WorldNetDaily
You might remember Theodore Roosevelt Malloch as a supposed descendant of Theodore Roosevelt who wrote a lot of Donald Trump fanfiction for WorldNetDaily before the 2016 election with enough chutzpah to beg Trump to name him vice president ... and then kinda disappeared after it was revealed that he had exaggerated his life in his WND-published autobiography, which may have extended to his claiming he was Trump's preferred pick for ambassador to the European Union (he wasn't). He has also been accused of falsely overstating his assets to obtain millions of dollars in bank loans (which he later filed for bankruptcy in an attempt to get out of paying back.He did pop up once more in 2018, when he was detained and questioned by the FBI and subpoenaed by Robert Mueller for his investigation.
Well, Malloch has popped up again at WND, in a June 8 article by Bob Unruh that rehashes a column Malloch wrote for another right-wing website:
Accusations of racism are thrown about these days like confetti at a Super Bowl parade. Math is racist, religion is racist, elections are racist, kids are racist and more.
But Theodore Roosevelt Malloch, a scholar and diplomat who now heads the The Roosevelt Group, has explained in a column at American Greatness the force in the country that has done more to prosper racism than any other:
The rest of Unruh's article is transcribing what Malloch said about the history of the Democratic Party, as if the party of the 1830s, 1860s or even the 1950s is exactly the same as the Democratic Party of today. He also wrote:
"The Democratic Party was founded in 1828 by the backers of General Andrew Jackson, a Southerner and ardent racist who owned slaves and thought nothing wrong with the practice. Jackson, who became the 8th president, earned his fortune in a cotton industry based entirely on slaveholding," he explained. "'Old Hickory' as his troops called him, was one tough son of a b----. Compromise was not in his lexicon. Aside from his attitudinal superiority over blacks, Jackson is also famous for the 'Trail of Tears' which forced Native Americans off their ancestral lands. These are the seminal beginning roots of the Democratic Party tradition in America."
MRC Objects When CNN's Stelter Doesn't Give Psaki The Fox News Treatment Topic: Media Research Center
At the Media Reserarch Center it's not just Whtie House press sedretary Jen Psaki who musdt be abused and denigrated on a daily basis -- anyone who doesn't treat her with that same off-the-charts level of contempt must be targeted as well. In that vein, we have a June 6 item by ragebot Nichoals Fondacaro that is one giant screed against CNN's Brian Stelter for refusing to hate Psaki as much as he does:
As a feature during Sunday’s so-called “Reliable Sources,” CNN host Brian Stelter flaunted a pre-taped interview with White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki where he came off as a bootlicker for the Biden administrations. Stelter ultimately embarrassed himself with softball question after softball question that added up into a huff piece for the Press Secretary. He even invited her to lash the media for getting stuff wrong with their reporting on the administration.
Stelter’s first question out of the gate was him asking Psaki to rip the press of inaccuracies in their reporting about Biden. “Busy summer ahead, infrastructure, election reform, what does the press get wrong when covering Biden's agenda, when you watch the news, when you read the news what, do you think we get wrong,” he begged her.
It was just last year that Stelter and the rest of the liberal media would treat Trump Press Secretary Kayleigh McEnany’s criticisms of the press as a threat to the First Amendment.
Either way, Psaki suggested that the media’s journalistic “muscles have atrophied a little bit over the last few years” because of former President Trump. She even quipped that the media had a bad long-term memory for how legislation got passed. Of course, Stelter just sat there and laughed.
But Stelter was now proud CNN had an insider as part of the Biden press office. And Psaki credited “sitting on set” with partially helping her to prepare for the role. “So, I tap into a lot of things. I had the honor and pleasure of doing in the past, including being a CNN commentator, including serving at the State Department and I know that helps me in the briefing every day,” she said.
The most critical Stelter got was when he was groveling for Biden to do more press conferences and asked if the lack of them was a strategy to project normalcy.
This is CNN.
Of course, McEnany's criticisms of the press" were actually abject hatred for any non-right-wing media outlet who tried to hold the Trump administration accountabe -- and the MRC got off on it every simgle time she ranted about the scrutiny. This is the MRC, and Fondacaro won't admit it.
For the June 7 NewsBusters podcast, Fondacaro and Curtis Houck -- who had a major crush on McEnany -- continued to spew hate against McEnany and Stelter. Houck ranted that the interview was "cockamamie BS" and "bat guano nonsense," adding,
I don't think it's a stretch to say these people don't care about you. this is what they do with their free time instead of asking substantive questions here. ... I think this rhetoric is really dangerous -- and I want to talk about this -- because I think it could really get someone hurt. Because these people go on and on and on bellyaching about the need for conservatives to watch our tone and our words matter. Fine. But we at NewsBusters condemned what happened at CNN when they had bombs sent to them by a Trump supporter. And I don't even want to see people like Jim Acosta threatened. We're gonna make fun of them, but we don't want anything bad to happen to them. And I said this at the time, and it's still true: These goobers deserve to live in peace. Their politics are messed up as it is, they should just be allowed to live their lives. But we're not Maxine Waters here, people. That's thte kind of thing we call out here at the MRC and NewsBusters. That's who they are; again, that's not who we are.
The problem is these people assume the worst and assume the worst motives of people they disagree with. You know, they seem to really enjoy this notion that families are tearing themselves apart, people cutting themselves off from family members and co-workers and what have you because they disagree with them.
Well, let's look at the record: The MRC was much more interested in shielding President Trump from responsibiility for inspiring the attempted bombing than denouncing the bombs themselves. Houck himself ranted at CNN for having "lashed out at Trump, insinuating his guilt and deeming his remarks insufficient" (though he did concede that "it’s inexcusable and unacceptable for that to happen to anyone in this country"). He also whined that CNN commentators "smeared conservative media for overwhelmingly being responsible for our country’s worsening discourse," insisting that right-wingers like himself merely "bring you the latest liberal media bias," not their actual job of trashing and denigrating them day in and day out.
Nevertheless, Houck continued: "Do they even see their political opponents as human beings? Do they believe in and relish the free exchange of ideas that Chris Matthews believed in?" Well, we know Houck and his MRC co-workers don't see non-right-wing reporters as human; their response to reporters being concerned about their safety after years of Trump (and, yes, MRV) demonization was to mock them as self-centered. Yes, thinking someone might murder you for doing your job does tend to make one "self-centered." Houck concluded by suggesting that any TV host who doesn't sound like Fox News doesn't love America -- so much for relishing the free exchange of ideas.
Houck even more laughably defended the MRC's attacks on CNN because "it's important to lower the temperature by identifying what's wrong." But accusing your ideological opposites of hating America is a temperature-lowering claim?
Speaking of lowering the temperature, Houck's buddy Fondacaro amply demonstrated in a June 17 post that the MRC isn't actually interested in doing that by absolutely loving a profane tirade by podcaster Joe Rogan:
During a very fiery segment on Thursday’s edition of The Joe Rogan Experience, the prolific eponymous podcaster and progressive YouTuber Kyle Kulinski tore into CNN media journalist and Reliable Sources host Brian Stelter for his bootlicking interview with White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki a couple of weeks ago. The two also teed off on CNN in general for not acting like “real people” and also calling for the “censorship” of their opponents.
Speaking about Stelter’s interview, Rogan was flabbergasted by what he saw. “Brian Stelter talking to the press secretary saying ‘what are we doing wrong?’ What are we doing wrong,” he exclaimed to Kulinski. “Like, hey motherfucker, you’re supposed to be a journalist!”
Rogan went further and thrashed CNN for thinking “they’re entitled to viewers” and failing to get them. “This is because the market has spoken and your show’s fucking terrible,” he chided. “That’s right. They suck. They’re terrible at it,” Kulinski agreed.
And despite Rogan comments going viral online, by the publication of the piece, Stelter had not publicly responded.
Why would Stelter respond to such a vile, obscene, vicious tirade? And why does Fondacaro think he's turning down the temperature by hyping Rogan calling Stelter a "motherfucker"?
Then, the next day on the podcast, Fondacaro gushed that Rogan "made a fool of Brian Stelter," while Houck added, "that was something else." No mention of any of that temperature-lowering he was lecturing about a week or so earlier. Apparently conservatives never raise the temperature with anything they say, no matter how vile. Perhaps Houck can explain some time how that works.
Houck and Fondacaro inadvertantly demonstrated why nobody should ever take the MRC's bad-faith "media criticism" seriously.
WND Walks Back False Attack On Black Lives Matter Topic: WorldNetDaily
Art Moore wrote in a May 19 WorldNetDaily article, under the headilne "Black Lives Matter sides with Hamas terrorists":
Expressing "solidarity" with "Palestinian liberation," the Black Lives Matter movement declared support for Hamas as the Iran-backed terrorist organization ruling Gaza continued firing rockets at Israel citizens.
"Black Lives Matter stands in solidarity with Palestinians," BLM said in a tweet Monday. "We are a movement committed to ending settler colonialism in all forms and will continue to advocate for Palestinian liberation. (always have. And always will be). #freepalestine"
Human rights lawyer Brooke Goldstein pointed out Hamas' values.
"I hope you mean #FreePalestine from Hamas that executed gays, throw political opponents off the roof and uses children as shields."
Hamas counts 215 Palestinian deaths from the Israeli airstrikes responding to the more than 3,000 Iranian-financed rockets aimed at Israeli citizens.
However, the Israel Defense Forces say that figure includes 120 members of Hamas and 25 members of Palestinian Islamic Jihad. Also, some 20% of the Hamas rockets have failed, landing inside Gaza.
The Biden administrations is urging Israel to wind down its defensive operations after nine days of Hamas attacks. But Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has vowed to "continue striking the terrorists ... for as long as it takes to restore calm" in Israel.
Just one problem: BLM said nothing about Hamas, and one can support "Palestinian liberation" without supporting Hamas.So Moore was forced to ever-so-quietly walk it back and stick a correction at the top of his article:
CORRECTION May 23, 2021 at 10:26 a.m. ET: An AFP fact-check noted that Black Lives Matter expressed solidarity with Palestinians but made no mention of supporting the terrorist group Hamas, as was stated in WND's original story. The original headline has been amended from "Black Lives Matter sides with Hamas terrorists" to "Black Lives Matter sides with Palestinians." The lead sentence of the story has also been amended to make it clear BLM is endorsing "Palestinian liberation" and not Hamas.
but Moore still tried to rather lamely link Hamas to Palestine in his rewritten lead paragraph: "As Hamas, the Iran-backed terrorist organization ruling Gaza continued firing rockets at Israel citizens, the Black Lives Matter movement has declared its support for 'Palestinian liberation.'"He also left the other references to Hamas in his article despite their irrelevance to the facts.
CNS Touted Record Low High Temp In DC -- But Censored News Of Record Heat Topic: CNSNews.com
An anonymous CNSNews.com reporter wrote in a May 30 article:
Record low temperatures are hitting the Washington, D.C. area this Memorial Day weekend, according to the National Weather Service.
On Saturday, according to NWS, the Baltimore Washington International Airport recorded a record-low daily “high” temperature of 56 degrees. The previous record had been 57 degrees. BWI is located south of Baltimore, Md., and about 32 miles north of the U.S. Capitol building.
“The new record low high of 56 degrees broke the old record of 57 degrees set in 2014,” said the NWS report.
The article carried the headline "Global Warming?" -- as if a two-day blip in a single city disproved decades of research proving that the entire planet is indeed warming.
By contrast, when a heat dome appeared over the Pacific Northwest, resulting in all-time record high temperatures, CNS reported absolutely nothing about it, completely censoring that news from its readers.
Why? Because CNS is beholden to right-wing interests and oil and gas companies who deny that global warming exists. Not only has its parent, the Media Research Center, received donations from oil companies (not to mention oil and gas financier T. Boone Pickens), it has published numerous articles that advance the agenda of the oil and gas industry.
So CNS' bias once again favors those who give it money. Is anyone surprised?