Posts Tagged ‘MSM’

Plenty of other people are covering the gruesome murders on the west coast…

Posted: November 30, 2009 by datechguy in elections, opinion/news
Tags: , , , , , ,

Robert Stacy, Michelle and oh just look at memeorandum thread and start clicking if you want details and it is all over it.

What I have to say is indirect commentary, much less important than the actual act but very telling…

In the first hour or so of Morning Joe today Mika was simply giddy with the idea that Mike Huckabee said on camera that he will likely not run since he doesn’t have the support of the base, she snidely talked about him not passing the “purity test” of the GOP and stressed it as an insult.

At this point Joe and Willie brought up events in Seattle and the fact that the killer was released by Mike Huckabee’s and will become his Willie Horton Moment.

You should have seen Mika’s face, it twisted and changed as if someone had run over her puppy. However later in the show the subject of “purity tests” came up again without the Huckabee connection and she was herself again.

Although the blindsiding of Mika, famous for wanting to deal with “hard news” was funny the real story was the fact that Joe and Willie knew all about what was going on in Seattle and it wasn’t making the news, the Houston Chronicle headline was shown but no further discussion.

Was it due to the race of the subject? Was it because it was concerning a released felon? I think it is because it has no bearing on their media template or ability to hit conservatives in general. It can only hurt Huck and they perfer Huck after all he is very beatable, even by Obama.

Today they briefly mentioned ACORN wanting to change it’s name, the dumping of documents? Not a word.

This is really about the News selection, the people at ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC, CNN et/al they KNOW about these stories, (Charlie Gibson not withstanding) and they choose to pretend otherwise or are ordered by their bosses to do so.

They are some of the best of the media’s coffee clatch crowd but are still part of that crowd and want to stay there. There is only so far off the reservation you can go and still be welcome at the parties and get the attention for the shows. That is the tightrope that they choose to walk. Re-admittance to that crowd was Andrew Sullivan’s reward for his change, would he be a regular on Chris Matthews’ show without it?

That’s why Sarah Palin drives them all nuts, she believes what she believes and you can take it or leave it , same with Rush he believes what he believes and doesn’t care what others think about it. They refuse to let others define them. It is a threat to the entire world view of the media culture.

I think their Radio show is going to be interesting, what will they choose to cover?

Note as I’m finishing this post there is 30 min to go in the show and they have hinted they will touch the topic again. Lets see…

Update: Nope Joe didn’t cover it but other liberal outlets are. The Huffpo commentators in particular see Huck’s Christianity and are charging like bulls toward a red cloth.

Meanwhile the Washington post says what I just did:

In a new Washington Post poll, Palin beats other GOP leaders on two questions: who best represents the party’s core values, and who Republicans would vote for if the presidential nomination battle were held today. But she has particular appeal to the loyal followers of Limbaugh and Beck, two of the most popular conservative talk show hosts in the country.

As long as she is unafraid her foes will be.

They don’t call it “talking points memo” for nothing

Posted: November 30, 2009 by datechguy in opinion/news
Tags: , , , , ,

Speaking of “Talking Points”

Do our beliefs form the basis of our partisan and ideological affiliations? Or is it vice versa?

There’s been a lot of recent evidence not only that Republicans disproportionately disbelieve the evidence for man-made global warming but that their skepticism is growing. I think that trend is fairly classed under the general heading of Republican/conservative hostility to science. But the other point interests me no less.

I’m going to go out on a limb here and assume that Mr. Marshall didn’t spend his thanksgiving in a cave somewhere either in a cave or somewhere neither of those phone network maps have coverage and did in fact hear that there is some new “global warming news” out there.

Don Surber states the obvious:

That is ironic because it is the left — not the right — that is ignoring the growing body of evidence that discredits the theory of anthropogenic global warming. Climategate revealed that data supporting this theory is corrupted by the political agenda and quest for government grants by proponents of anthropogenic global warming at Penn State and at the University of East Anglia in Norwich, England.

Today I’m am over an 1:15 into Morning Joe and no mention, the media is doing it’s best to totally ignore this story in keeping with its niche market model. I presume that Marshall has decided to do the same. He should take a lesson from Paul Mirengoff at Powerline:

In the law, the discovery of this sort of intentional document destruction would quite likely give rise to some form of “adverse inference instruction,” wherein the judge would instruct or encourage the jury to assume that the discarded evidence was harmful to the case of the party that destroyed it. I might be hesitant to apply this logic to the world of scientific inquiry were it not for the fact that the CRU scientists have demonstrated as little regard for honest adjudication of their position as your run-of-the-mill spoliator of evidence.

To be sure, the current head of the CRU was not in charge when the data were thrown away in the 1980s. Moreover, climate change was not such a heavily politicized issue in those days.

Still, Roger Pielke, the Colorado professor who asked for the records, is quite correct when he says that the CRU is basically insisting that we trust it, a demand that’s inconsistent with the scientific method for resolving debates.

One need not be a hard-core global warming skeptic to question whether we should alter the way we live in response to predictions based on findings that cannot be checked because the raw data was intentionally destroyed by the outfit that made the findings.

Ah but one apparently does need to be a person not wedded to the hard core left for their readership or customer base. When you don’t care about your credibility anything is possible.

I only made it downstairs at 6:14 a.m.

Posted: November 30, 2009 by datechguy in opinion/news
Tags: , ,

So I don’t know if they mentioned the story (thrown away Global Warming data) in the first 15 minutes but I don’t even see it in the crawl.

The Green network must be becoming the golden network as in “silence is”.

Q: What do the “Global Warming” people have in common with some forms of Protestantism?

Posted: November 29, 2009 by datechguy in internet/free speech, opinion/news
Tags: , , , ,

A: Apparently they also are making the argument that the salvation of Global Warming should be a question of faith and not works:

SCIENTISTS at the University of East Anglia (UEA) have admitted throwing away much of the raw temperature data on which their predictions of global warming are based.

It means that other academics are not able to check basic calculations said to show a long-term rise in temperature over the past 150 years.

They did keep what they refer to as “adjusted” data.

Let’s put this in a way our liberal friends can understand: Do you remember this iconic picture?

The woman above is Rose Mary Woods. She was President Nixon’s secretary who claims to have “accidentally” erased the 18 1/2 minute gap in the Watergate tapes. Lets pretend it is 1973 and All the Watergate tapes were erased and only “reconstructions” created by the Nixon White House were available. Would you have taken the Nixon White House’s word that the tapes were “accidentally” erased? Did you take Rose Mary Woods word? Is that credible?

In the letter of St. James he says the following:

So also faith of itself, if it does not have works, is dead. James 2:17

In the same way, Science without data is “hypothesis” at best and “speculation” at worst.

If you still want to believe in this that’s up to you, far be it from me to tell you what religion you want to follow but don’t tell me it is “settled peer reviewed science”.

And Roger as far as your suggestion to postpone the UN Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen, not a chance! The people feeding at the Climate Change troth are going to try to push through one last big score while the gravy train still exists. Time is not on their side. That have to act NOW if they want our money.

How the MSM decides to cover this will be interesting.

Update: My friend Robert Stacy gives me the best blogging anniversary present there is: A top level link! He also touches on a pet peeve of mine:

This temptation to think that we are morally superior to our ancestors, you see, is the road to hell that Scientism paves.

The biggest problem with the baby boom generation is they never grew out of the teenage idea that they were smarter than their parents. That failure as much as the changes of the 60’s are the cause of a lot of the troubles we have today.

Oh as for transubstantiation the physics are identical to the physics of parting the Red Sea, Of Jonah and the Whale, the Feeding of the 5,000 and Peter’s healing of the cripple. Miracle of God. There is a long history of that kind of thing.

As a person who has been an eyewitness to at least one Miracle in person I’ve never understood why believing Christians have no problem believing all those other miracles but not Transubstantiation.

And herein lies what both Robert Stacy and I have over the climate guys. We disagree on this subject, passionately I suspect, but are not only unafraid to debate it publicly we will still be friends when our debate is done.

A person pushing real science or interested in truth doesn’t shut down debate. That was the biggest clue all along.

Update 2: In comments the discussion is Tradition tradition tradition…

Update 3: Gad-fry remembers Rose Mary Woods and comes up with his own 60’s connection.

Update 4: Democrat=Socialist has a good point:

If an employer can use computer forensics to find that Jenna Haze video you downloaded on the company laptop, couldn’t any diligent media outlet or United States DOJ (ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!) do the same?

That will depend on a couple of things, first to the tapes ACTUALLY still exist? They may not. Secondly it depends on how the data was wiped. If the assumption is that they wanted the data destroyed they would have certainly thought of this.

His suggestion is actually rather ironic considering this story, speak of the Nixon tapes and they are in the News again:

The US National Archives is bringing together investigators to search for scribbled secrets from the early days of the Watergate scandal as the chain of events began that destroyed Richard Nixon’s presidency.

The elusive goal is to discover what Nixon and an aide discussed during the infamous 18189-minute gap in a White House tape recording of a meeting held three days after burglars linked to the president’s re-election committee broke into Democratic Party headquarters at the Watergate complex, then an office building in Washington.

Serious Irony.

Older Entries
Newer Entries