Obama presented inaccurate birth control statistics 6


How many times have you heard President Obama and his HHS Secretary, Kathleen Sebelius claim that 99 percent of all women have used contraception? As a variation on the statistic, they claim that 98 percent of Catholic women have used birth control at some time. This is stated as fact by their lapdogs in the mainstream media (MSM) and the anti-Catholic Hollywood elite. And yet the government’s own National Center for Health Statistics refutes the claim … More…

What’s not in the mainstream media? 4


By Tom Quiner

A quick scan of headlines tonight and in recent months is revealing for what it doesn’t report.

Bill Maher calls Sarah Palin a c**t. He gives Barack Obama’s PAC a million bucks.  Not a peep from the MSM. No one asks the president if he’ll give the money back, except for a Fox News reporter who is ignored at the president’s press conference.

Did Rush Limbaugh receive the same treatment?

A 1990 video of Barack Obama emerges with the future president invoking a large crowd to open their hearts and mind to professor Derrick Bell, a man who embraces racial views considered extreme. Professor Bell has been characterized as a “radical academic” with ties to Jeremiah Wright.

The video evidently has been suppressed for years.

Why isn’t the MSM interested in digging into the Barack Obama’s past with the same zeal they use on George W. Bush or Sarah Palin? Thank goodness for Breitbart and Fox.

Now I don’t know much about Professor Bell. But in light of Mr. Obama’s appeal for us to open our hearts and minds to this man, perhaps we deserve to know more, and should have know more four years ago. Would Mr. Obama have been electable if it turns out Professor Bell’s ideas are racist and radical?

Wind farms paid not to produce?

On the Fox News website, I saw a piece about a wind farm that was paid NOT to produce. In light of Mr. Obama’s executive decision to distribute taxpayer money in the name of green energy, shouldn’t this be a big story?

I didn’t see anything on CNN, ABC, or MSNBC websites, although the latter had a story titled, “Birds Get Special Treatment.” Sounds pretty hard-hitting.

Mr. Obama has a problem. The MSM is losing their clout.

Everyone with half a brain knows they’re in the tank for Mr. Obama. Their lack of fairness and balance along with their fear of being politically incorrect has opened the door to the likes of Fox News and their refreshingly different approach of “fair, balanced, unafraid.”

My friends on the Left roll their eyes when they hear me defend Fox.

That’s fine. Their ratings blow everyone else away, because of the growing disgust of the liberal bias of the MSM.

When you throw in Breitbart along with the conservative blogosphere, it’s getting tougher and tougher for the MSM to protect their man’s radical past, and his radical record as president.

What’s not in the mainstream media? Who cares? I don’t watch them anymore.

Mainstream Media on trial 1


By Tom Quiner

Newt Gingrich’s marital history is ancient history.

It has been reported on ad infinitum. Much of it is true. Much of it is distorted.

ABC chose to keep this old story alive with an interview with Mr. Gingrich’s second wife, Marianne. They chose to air the hit piece days before today’s South Carolina primary in order to maximize the damage to his candidacy.

Why the intense interest in keeping old news alive when in the previous election cycle, the same media showed no interest into digging into Barack Obama’s “hidden years” which, by his own admission, included cocaine use?

Or turn back the clock to 1992 when Bill Clinton came onto the national scene with his run for the presidency. CBS had the Gennifer Flower story about to break. Rather than bury Clinton with it, they massaged the story to help him. Don Hewitt, executive producer of 60 Minutes, explained why:

“And they came to us because they were in big trouble in New Hampshire.  They were about to lose right there and they needed some first aid.  They needed some bandaging.  What they needed was a paramedic.  So they came to us and we did it and that’s what they wanted to do.  When I told Tim Russert that I was persona-non-grata at the White House, he said, “Why?”  I said, “The Gennifer Flowers interview.”  He said, “You got him the nomination.”  I said, “I know that.”  As far as I know from the conversations I’ve had, Bernie Nussbaum knew that, Gergen knows that, Lloyd Cutler certainly knows it ’cause Lloyd had a hand in his coming on that night.

You know it was strong medicine the way I edited it but he was a very sick candidate.  He needed very strong medicine, and I’m not in the business of doctoring candidates but he got up out of a sick bed that night and walked to the nomination and as I said to Mandy, “You know if I’ld edited it your way, you know where you’d be today?  You’d still be up in New Hampshire looking for the nomination.”  He became the candidate that night.”

Mr. Hewitt is pretty forthright in his acknowledgement that the fix was in to help Mr. Clinton’s candidacy.

You could see the pro Clinton tilt in another story that simmered and just died. That had to do about allegations that he was a counter cultural draft dodger. Evidently, the college-aged Bill Clinton took a mysterious 40 day trip behind the Iron Curtain in 1969.

There were questions. What was he doing there?

How did this poor kid from the wrong side of the tracks in Arkansas pay for the trip?

And how had he avoided the draft? R. Emmett Tyrrell, Jr., publisher of the American Spectator, summarized it this way in his book, “Boy Clinton:”

“Clinton’s election prospects flickered and dimmed. Then, as his staff pondered how to salvage the campaign, something amazing happened. The stories simply died. Reporters were not offended by the lies Clinton had been laying on them for years. Citizens’ groups did not demand an honest account of his draft record, his anti-war activities, his visits to Communist countries at the height of the Cold War, visits that seemed to have the support of Communist governments. The stories had absolutely no effect on the election; few news organizations even picked them up.”

Mr. Clinton even stayed in the home of a member of the ruling communist party in Prague, and yet journalists had no curiosity about what transpired.

Can you imagine if it was Sara Palin?

The media flew hundreds of journalists into Alaska to dig up dirt on Ms. Palin.

Why such little interest in the background of Mssrs. Obama and Clinton?

It is this transparent bias that may actually be working to Newt Gingrich’s advantage. Everyone on the both sides of the aisle know they’re out to get him. His clear, hard-hitting response to John King’s “gotcha” question thrilled the legions of voters fed up with the leftward tilt of the mainstream media.

We saw it after Wednesday night’s debate again. CNN had a PolitiFact segment to check on the accuracy of Mr. Gingrich’s assertion that RomneyCare helped to fund abortions in Massachusetts. Their fact checker said Gingrich was wrong and Romney was right.

In other words, Gingrich lied.

And yet candidate Fred Thompson made the EXACT same claim in a 2007 candidate debate. Here’s what Mr. Thompson said:

“So what sort of services does Romney’s health care plan provide? Per the state web site: $50 co-pay for abortions. While [a] court mandate requires Massachusetts to cover ‘medically necessary’ abortions in state-subsidized health plans, Mitt Romney’s plan covers ALL abortions — no restrictions.”

What did PolitiFact say about Thompson’s claim? That it is true.

PolitiFact says Ginrich lied and Thompson said the truth.

Same issue. Same assertion. Different outcome.

Whether you like Newt Gingrich or not, it is impossible to ignore the bias.

Gingrich is taking the media to task, and crowds are responding with unprecedented standing ovations. You’ll hear his response at about 2:30 into the video clip above.

He has turned the tables on them. It is the media that is now on trial.