John ruberry
John “Lee” Ruberry of the Magnificent Seven

By John Ruberry

The leftist group MoveOn got its start as Bill Clinton was being impeached. Their initial message was along the lines of, Bubba has done a great job running the country, his affair with Monica Lewinsky was inappropriate, and now it’s time for Americans to, well, move on.

Now if only the cheerleaders in the media for the Democratic Party could do the same.

There’s a book’s worth of material out there for this post, but I’ll zoom in on just a few today. Dahleen Glanton, an African American Chicago Tribune columnist, puts the blame on the Democrats failure to keep the White House on where she feels it belongs. Yes, the headline gives the ending away, “White women, own up to it: You’re the reason Hillary Clinton lost.” Yet the first sentence of that column betrays how foolish she is, “I don’t understand women.” Her dazzling display of ignorance continues for another two dozen paragraphs.

There must be vile fumes from the Chicago River poisoning the minds of Chicago newspaper columnists, as ignorance begets insanity. I had to read Neil Steinberg’s Nazi-drenched column about Donald Trump and his advisor Steven Bannon, who, by the way, is not an anti-Semite, three times before I gave up trying to make sense of it. Well, almost.  When I am confronted with Nazis and insanity I do one thing and that is listen to avante-garde rockers the Residents’ masterpiece, “The Third Reich and Roll,” only this time I did so while trying to block out of my memory all of my knowledge of the 1960s garage pop classics that are satirized in this work, as a possible gateway into Steinberg’s rambling mess. That didn’t work either. But hey, I tried.

At the end of his column he all but claims that it will be followers of a religion who have been scapegoated for centuries who will be blamed if Trump’s economy doesn’t take off as he promises it will.

Oh, do newspaper columnists have editors anymore?

Dana Milbank of the Washington Post, who was exposed as a colluder with the Democratic National Committee by WikiLeaks, is calling the incoming Trump administration “the fake news presidency.” Yet two months ago Milbank was covering for Clinton’s “deplorables” gaffe by claiming that “she might have low-balled the number.”

Wrong.

Perhaps what these mainstream media hacks really need is a good cry, which is something the Residents have done as they confide in “Hitler Was a Vegetarian.”

Yes, it’s your party, I know it’s your party
And, you know that you can cry, and, it’s cool
But you have to remember that I too cried my 96 tears
And… it’s just something we all have to go through some time or another.

Get to it.

And then move on.

John Ruberry regularly blogs at Marathon Pundit.

Back when Donald Trump announced his run for the presidency I wrote a post titled: We Take Donald Trump Lightly at our Peril and Cruz supprter that I was noted that Donald Trump had one advantage that other candidates not named Hillary Clinton did not:

trump twitter

2.9 MILLION. He has more people following him on twitter than all the candidates above combined except Rubio & Paul and easily has more than double of the two of them combined.

And explained what that meant

It means his campaign can get an unfiltered message out to nearly 3 million people instantly, without worrying about what the media will say. In one tweet his words will reach almost as many people as CNN, MSNBC & Fox draw in primetime COMBINED.

This proved vital because one of the primary advantages the MSM provides to the left is the ability to control the narrative and define their foes. Trump’s fame meant he was already defined and his large Twitter following meant that he could control his own narrative

18 months latter the whole “control the narrative” business has gotten harder to wit

trumptwitter2

So problem: How does the MSM go after Trump when he is in even a better position to bypass them.

Answer Stephen Bannon:

Stephen Bannon, formally of Breitbart news is not a social media giant. Not only does he have under 20K followers, he hasn’t bothered to tweet in over two years.

And while under his leadership Breitbart News has expanded to the point where we have Breitbart Texas, Breitbart London, Breitbart Jerusalem, Breitbart California giving them a huge reach in terms of stories the MSM has studiously ignored, downplayed or dismissed any story from Breitbart News and irrelevant, treating Breitbart news much like they did Andrew Breitbart himself.

This means these stats notwithstanding

Stephen Bannon is completely and utterly definable by the MSM in a way that Donald Trump is not.

Thus we can expect the full court press on Bannon for as long as possible. He will be hounded, derided and attacked as a way to go after Donald Trump, and this will continue even if the president elect uses his direct line to the American people to stand by him and call out the MSM for the liars they are. (Which he should do immediately). It’s classic alinsky, personalize and attack, if they can’t get Trump, go after Bannon in the hopes that enough heat scares the GOP to try to get them to nudge him out.

On the bright side, Bannon is experienced enough in terms of how the press works and the president elect is experienced enough in media to see this for what it is and not let it get him off track. He’s not going to panic, the only question is will GOP members in congress learn from that example or let themselves be played by the MSM confirming the label “the stupid party” that they earned.

Closing thought: As a person who knew and liked Andrew Breitbart as I do Stephen Bannon I find the sudden faux respect for Andrew Breitbart that the left is proclaiming in their attacks on him (the whole “Andrew would be turning in his grave” business) only slightly less offensive than the false attacks on him. It demonstrates that the fastest way or a conservative to gain the respect of the MSM is to die.


If you’d like to help support independent non MSM journalism and opinion please consider hitting DaTipJar




Olimometer 2.52

Please consider Subscribing. Right now our subscribers consist of 1/50 of 1% of our total unique visitors based on last years numbers.

If we can get another 150 subscribers at $10 a month (another 1/10 of 1% of those who have visited this year) We can meet our annual goals with no trouble, with the same number of subscribers at $20 a month I could afford to cover the presidential campaign outside of New England firsthand.

And of course at that price you get the Da Magnificent Seven plus those we hope to add on and all subscribers get my weekly podcast emailed directly to you before it goes up anywhere else.


Choose a Subscription level



Yesterday I talked about how Hillary Clinton and Democrats were caught flat footed by the FBI re-opening their email investigation. but what’s been really interesting is how the line of James Comey have changed with the same GOP member praising this decision who called him corrupt a few weeks ago and Democrats who praised his integrity a few weeks ago crying “foul!

In the last 36 hours FBI Director James Comey has been slammed by the full force of the progressive left media. I noted yesterday that, within hours of the letter being released, NY Times columnist Paul Krugman was accusing Comey of trying to swing the election for Republicans or, at a minimum, of trying to preserve their control of congress. A Democratic PAC filed a complaint with the DOJ that Comey had violated the Hatch Act by publishing the letter. A CNN legal analyst wrote today that it was time for Comey to resign…

…With all the accusations flying, I thought it was a good moment to recall a Washington Post editorial from back in July. That was when Comey announced he would not bring charges against Clinton. In an editorial titled “Republicans attack Mr. Comey for doing his job” the Post rebuked the right for for questioning Comey’s decision making:…

…A few months ago, criticizing Comey was risking damage to the rule of law. Now that it might be Hillary’s ox getting gored, bashing Comey is just fair game.

It brings to mind the Climatic Scene from Shakespeare’s the Merchant of Venice where you have Shylock saying lines such as: A Daniel come to judgment, yea, a Daniel!—O wise young judge, how I do honor thee!, O noble judge! O excellent young man! Oh wise upright judge, when granted the pound of flesh from his bond, and then, when the same judge said that you aren’t allowed any blood and if you shed any you lose your goods suddenly it was Gratiano saying: O learnèd judge!—Mark, Jew, a learnèd judge! An upright judge, a learnèd judge! A second Daniel!

So what is actually going on here? Is Comey a Clinton dupe or not? Here is what I think

I still think James Comey was as a Clinton dupe, didn’t mind playing the game and seemingly didn’t care about the blowback as long as it was about him. I think because of this when the compromised Loretta Lynch advised him against the release of this letter to congress:

Attorney General Loretta Lynch advised FBI Director James Comey against sending a letter to Congress to inform them about the reopening of the investigation into Hillary Clinton’s private email server.

She and team Clinton had every expectation that her advice would be followed. That’s why Clinton allies were blindsided and reacted thus:

“I’m livid, actually,” one Clinton surrogate told The Hill. “This has turned into malpractice. It’s an unforced error at this point. I have no idea what Comey is up to but the idea this email issue is popping back up again is outrageous. It never should have occurred in the first place. Someone somewhere should have told her no. And they didn’t and now we’re all paying the price.”

So why the change of heart, well the clue is here:

In an internal memo obtained by Fox News, the beleaguered director noted that the FBI typically would not communicate with the public when reopening a case, according to a Department of Justice source. But Comey said he had to in this case because Clinton is seeking the White House in an election on Nov. 8.

“Of course we don’t ordinarily tell Congress about ongoing investigations, but here I feel an obligation to do so given that I testified repeatedly in recent months that our investigation was completed,” Comey wrote. “I also think it would be misleading to the American people were we not to supplement the record.

You see, when he thought the storm would only affect him and his reputation that didn’t matter, but then it produced stories like this:

ANALYSIS: TRUE. Richard Nixon could only wish he got Hillary’s FBI treatment.

and this

NOTHING TO SEE HERE, IT’S OLD NEWS, TIME TO MOVE ON: Clinton Ally Aided Campaign of FBI Official’s Wife.

and this

JAMES COMEY COULD NOT BE REACHED TO IGNORE THIS ACCUSATION. Newt Gingrich on Veritas Videos: ‘Where’s the FBI?’

and this

CULTURE OF CORRUPTION: New FBI files contain allegations of ‘quid pro quo’ in Clinton’s emails.

and this

THE FBI REVOLT BEGINS: A retired FBI agent says “The FBI has politicized itself, and its reputation will suffer for a long time. I hold Director Comey responsible.”

and a hundred more like it, that’s when he realized that not only was the reputation of the entire FBI compromised ,but story after story of the rank and file of the FBI bitterly resenting the tarnishing of the entire agency image over his attempt to cover for Hillary Clinton meant trouble in the ranks.

I suspect Comey didn’t anticipate this, but now he’s discovered that the FBI is not the MSM.

The ability of the chief national law enforcement arm to protect the country from things like Islamic Terror, properly enforce the laws, or even hunt fugitives is difficult if not impossible without the cooperation of law-abiding citizens.  I suspect James Comey didn’t anticipate his acts would convince a good chunk of the country that the FBI was no longer a law enforcement agency but just another arm of the Democrat party and would enforce the law accordingly.

The MSM can successfully function even if half the citizenry dismiss them as corrupt tools of one political party and treat them as such. The FBI can not.

I think Comey decided that it’s one thing to cover for the Clintons it’s another when running that interference takes down your entire agency.

Update:  Fixed poor sentence structure in a paragraph.


If you’d like to help support independent non MSM journalism and opinion please consider hitting DaTipJar




Olimometer 2.52

Please consider Subscribing. Right now our subscribers consist of 1/50 of 1% of our total unique visitors based on last years numbers.

If we can get another 150 subscribers at $10 a month (another 1/10 of 1% of those who have visited this year) We can meet our annual goals with no trouble, with the same number of subscribers at $20 a month I could afford to cover the presidential campaign outside of New England firsthand.

And of course at that price you get the Da Magnificent Seven plus those we hope to add on and all subscribers get my weekly podcast emailed directly to you before it goes up anywhere else.


Choose a Subscription level



Blogger outside of Wrigley Field
Blogger outside of Wrigley Field

By John Ruberry

“Bias has always been a factor in journalism. It’s nearly impossible to remove. Humans have their thoughts, and keeping them out of your work is difficult. But 2016 saw the remaining veneer of credibility, thin as it was, stripped away and set on fire.” Derek Hunter, Townhall, October 23, 2016.

“A free press can, of course, be good or bad, but, most certainly without freedom, the press will never be anything but bad.” Albert Camus.

Both men are right.

I’ve known for many years that the mainstream media, consisting mostly of leftists, is biased, but I’ve also long suspected that these leftists have been colluding with the Democrats. Thanks to WikiLeaks we know that to be true.

The 2016 World Series, an intriguing matchup between the Chicago Cubs–of whom Hillary Clinton used to be a fan of–and the Cleveland Indians, begins Tuesday.

Which got me thinking: What if the self-righteous media guardians, umpires you might say, were in charge of baseball’s fall classic?

When the Chicago Clintons come to bat, their batters will earn a walk after three balls, Cleveland, Donald Trump’s team, will need five balls to gain a base on balls, and they’ll strike out after two strikes.

The media umpires, when the Clintons are in trouble, will take out their smartphones during the games and pass on actionable advice to their manager, who will quickly reply and request more pointers. Player after player for the Trumps will be ejected because the umpires will reveal decades-old sexual assault allegations just as the Cleveland team takes the field. Another Cleveland Trumps player will be ejected because he may not have paid federal income taxes. The umpires will claim it was only just then that they learned about about this tax issue.

Meanwhile charges that the Clintons are taking large cash payments from outsiders that could destroy the integrity of Major League Baseball are for the most part ignored–and not acted upon. And even though the umpires know that the Clintons destroyed evidence of their improprieties, they’ll deem it “old news.” The umpires will overlook the lies from the Clintons about their crimes.

When the fans in the ballpark complain, they’ll be rudely dismissed by the umpires as morons who don’t know how the contest is played.

But the truth is the public knows all too well that the game is rigged.

As Walter Cronkrite used to end his CBS Evening News broadcast, “That’s the way it is.”

And the way it is stinks. We need a new media.

John Ruberry regularly blogs at Marathon Pundit.

smith

Diz: Not one word of what he’s saying is being printed in that state
Saunders: Oh no Diz!
Diz: Taylor has practically every paper in the state lined up and he’s feeding them doctored up junk!

Mr. Smith Goes to Washington 1939

We’ve been busing in people for fifty years to stop you ******* ******** and we’re not going to stop now!

Scott Forval

The 2nd Project Veritas Tape dropped while I was asleep this morning and it talks about the where’s, and the hows on voter fraud:

Four thoughts:

  1.  As I write this right now CNN is literally saying there is practically no such thing as voter fraud. If you do a search of James O’Keefe under google news you will find tons of links to the O’Keefe tapes, none of them are from NBC, CBS, ABC, CNN, NYT, LAT, Washington Post, Boston Globe, Chicago Tribune et/al. As far as they are concerned this stuff doesn’t exist. O’Keefe has said ” If Media Covered Project Veritas Like They Covered Trump Tape, ‘I Guarantee You Trump Would Win the Election“.

This is why they don’t.

2. Every single major news organization, every single national newspaper, every major state paper and every major paper from individual cities have vastly more resources that James O’Keefe and Project Veritas. Any of them could have done the investigative work that Mr. O’Keefe and Project Veritas did and exposed these practices that have apparently been going on for decades.

They chose not to.

3. Conservatives have been saying this kind of thing has been  going on for years. invariably Democrat pols their allies and every single major news organization, every single national newspaper practically every major state paper and practically every major city paper have been calling the people who are claiming this was happening “Conspiracy Theorists”.

They were not

4. There is a huge overlap between the people who work for NBC, CBS, ABC, CNN, NYT, LAT, Washington Post, Boston Globe, Chicago Tribune et/al and those who have worked for Democrats in public office.  It is very likely that some of these people knew this stuff was going on and could have reported on it for the public good

They did not.

You know I’ll wager there were hundreds of people who got into journalism who thought they were going to be Woodward and Bernstein, who thought they were going to change the world and do good.  They saw themselves as the boy rangers from Mr. Smith Goes to Washington taking on the rich and powerful.

I’ll bet they never imagined that by their cowardice and silence they would instead essentially become the Taylor machine keeping  silent for the sake of the connected and to maintain their own positions instead.

It’s rather sad actually.

Closing thoughts

While it’s all well and good to get these revelations out there the real question is: What will we as a nation do about it?  Will we do ANYTHING about it?   How we answer that question will reveal who we are as a nation and determine once and for all what kind of government we deserve.

As a Catholic in general and a Christian in particular we are required to love and pray for both the people doing this to us, and the media who are enabling them by their silence. This is not an optional doctrine.


If you’d like to help support independent non MSM journalism and opinion please consider hitting DaTipJar




Olimometer 2.52

Please consider Subscribing. Right now our subscribers consist of 1/50 of 1% of our total unique visitors based on last years numbers.

If we can get another 150 subscribers at $10 a month (another 1/10 of 1% of those who have visited this year) We can meet our annual goals with no trouble, with the same number of subscribers at $20 a month I could afford to cover the presidential campaign outside of New England firsthand.

And of course at that price you get the Da Magnificent Seven plus those we hope to add on and all subscribers get my weekly podcast emailed directly to you before it goes up anywhere else.


Choose a Subscription level



screen-shot-2016-10-16-at-9-48-38-am

The New York Times’ decision to draw a line in the sand against Donald Trump’s threat to file a libel suit may come back to haunt the news organization.

The issue involves a story about two women who allege that the presidential candidate groped or kissed them without their consent. In a letter asking for a retraction, Trump’s attorney claimed the article was libelous, reckless and defamatory. The Times’ attorney fired back: “…[I]f he believes that American citizens had no right to hear what these women had to say and that the law of this country forces us and those who would dare to criticize him to stand silent or be punished, we welcome the opportunity to have a court set him straight.”

The Times’ response is extraordinary in that most news organizations, when facing such a threat, issue the appropriate response: “We stand by our story.”

As an expert witness in nearly 30 defamation lawsuits, I have never seen a news organization take such a combative and public stance except in the courtroom. But The Times’ lawyer seemed pleased with the response. See http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/18/insider/i-hardly-expected-my-letter-to-donald-trump-to-go-viral.html

This immediate and rather vitriolic letter places The Times with both feet in the presidential muck that this campaign has become. No longer is the news organization standing above the fray.

In an editorial, The Times lectured Trump on constitutional law. “it should come as no surprise that Donald Trump, the Republican nominee for president, is as ignorant about constitutional law as he is about every other matter pertinent to the nation’s highest office.”

The editorial noted Times v. Sullivan, the important case that defined the tenets for a successful libel suit against a public official, which was extended to a public figure in a later case. Trump would have to prove the Times engaged in reckless disregard of the truth.

What The Times failed to mention is another important libel case: Herbert v. Lando.

Anthony Herbert was a U.S. Army officer in Vietnam who claimed he witnessed war crimes that his commanding officer refused to investigate. In a 1973 report on 60 Minutes, correspondent Mike Wallace and producer Barry Lando argued that Herbert had lied and was himself guilty of war crimes. The Army officer filed a libel suit.

Even though CBS eventually won the suit, the U.S. Supreme Court provided plaintiffs like Herbert, and potentially Trump, the ability to investigate the “state of mind” of journalists while they are reporting a story.

“When a member of the press is alleged to have circulated damaging falsehoods and is sued for injury to the plaintiff’s reputation, there is no privilege under the First Amendment’s guarantees of freedom of speech and freedom of the press barring the plaintiff from inquiring into the editorial processes of those responsible for the a publication.”

I doubt the news organization wants to have its editorial process placed under a microscope. The Times may win the battle and lose the war. To wit, I do stand by my story.


Christopher Harper, a recovering journalist with The Associated Press, Newsweek, ABC News and The Washington Times, teaches media law

 

the-big-con

Henry Gondorff: It’s not like playing winos in the street. You can’t outrun …
Hooker: [Interrupting] I don’t play for no winos.
Henry Gondorff: …you gotta keep his con, even after you spent his money. He can’t know you took him.
Hooker: You’re scared of him!
Henry Gondorff: Right down to my socks buster. You’re talking about a guy wou’ll kill a grifter over a chunk of money wouldn’t support him for two days.

The Sting 1973

Screwtape: I have known a human defended from strong temptations to social ambition by a still stronger taste for tripe and onions.

CS Lewis Screwtape 8

The united outrage of the media over Donald Trump is, in many ways completely unfathomable.

It’s not his positions, are plenty of pols who from Ted Cruz to Herman Cain from Ronald Reagan to Barry Goldwater and more who have advocated positions similar to these.

It’s not his language. There have been plenty of Pols who have had untamed mouths and saucy speech from Jim Curley to Jim Traficant who have been on the scene.

It’s not his wealth, the number of very rich people who have run for office from Mike Bloomberg to George Washington to JFK likely can’t be counted.

It’s not even the alleged way he has treated women: Bill Clinton, Ted Kennedy , need I say more?

No, to the media the crime of Donald trump, the ultimate crime, the crime that can’t be forgiven is he has revealed the big con.

Years ago I spoke to a pol who told me of a piece of wisdom an elderly office holder gave him when he first entered public life. He said most of it was a grift about making a comfortable living for yourself and if you’re very lucky you might just do some good along the way. Of course if your goal is to make that living you can’t let the people in on the con.

Thus the higher you go up the chain, the bigger the rewards for the position you have, and the more dependent you are on the con being maintained, because without that con you can’t get the wealth, the status or might risk being rejected by the arbiters of acceptability.

And that’s where Donald Trump throws a wrench into the system.

Unlike all the others who have talked about  voter fraud, media bias, that the fix is in, Donald Trump is different.

  • He’s not dependent on either the political system or the media for the wealth he has amassed.
  • He’s got a built in fan base that all of the media’s efforts won’t be able to destroy
  • He doesn’t give a tinker cuss about what any of these people, who for decades treated him as a golden boy for ratings, copy and money who abandoned him think about him anymore.

He is like a rich man who had somehow convinced himself that a trophy wife loved him being showed tapes of that trophy wife in bed with her lover and at a party with her friends telling both that she never really loved her husband, it was all about what he could do for him, and wants revenge.

And that revenge is to expose the big con on a platform so large they can’t prevent a large amount of the public for seeing that they’ve been played for decades.

Personally I don’t think the price the media and the system are going to pay is worth it.

Closing thoughts. You might wonder if Mr. Trump is worried about the vengeance that both the system and media will take on him after the election is done, particularly if he loses. Alas for them both the now undeluded Trump knows three things.

  1. As soon as the election is over those same people out for his blood right now will still have designs on the wealth and will be coming back hat in hand for a piece of it (and boy will he make them pay for it).
  2. There is nothing stopping him from buying dying papers and making his own competing media putting those in fear of the diminishing job prospects in the press, in an interesting spot.
  3. He’s also rich enough that if the entire media and government system decided they want revenge, he has enough that he, his children and his grandchildren can live full comfortable lives till the end of their days..

In other words short of actually killing him or his loved ones, they can’t do a thing to him, and he has the wealth and power to keep himself and his family secure.


If you’d like to help support independent non MSM journalism and opinion please consider hitting DaTipJar




Olimometer 2.52

Please consider Subscribing. Right now our subscribers consist of 1/50 of 1% of our total unique visitors based on last years numbers.

If we can get another 150 subscribers at $10 a month (another 1/10 of 1% of those who have visited this year) We can meet our annual goals with no trouble, with the same number of subscribers at $20 a month I could afford to cover the presidential campaign outside of New England firsthand.

And of course at that price you get the Da Magnificent Seven plus those we hope to add on and all subscribers get my weekly podcast emailed directly to you before it goes up anywhere else.


Choose a Subscription level



By John Ruberry

A couple of headlines caught my attention this afternoon. Here’s one: “WikiLeaks Releases More Purported Emails, Bringing Total To More Than 11,000,” comes from NPR. Wow. This federally funded news outlet I guess “forgot” that the victim of the hack, Hillary Clinton campaign chair John Podesta, admitted that his private emails were illegally breached. But he added, without evidence, that some of that correspondence may have been altered. Bloomberg writes, “WikiLeaks Releases More Alleged E-Mails From Top Clinton Aide.” Bloomberg: Are you paying attention?

So yes, Podesta’s emails were hacked. By whom? The Clinton campaign is blaming the Russian government, offering little in proof, although this morning on Fox News Sunday, Donald Trump’s running mate, Mike Pence says “the evidence continues to point in that direction.” The Clinton campaign, outside of Podesta, refuses to acknowledge the legitimacy of these emails, claiming that the Russians are trying to sway the results of this autumn’s election, while deflecting findings from those emails, which include Bill Clinton receiving a $1 million birthday check for the Clinton Foundation–the charity is really a slush fund, by the way–from the government of Qatar, which we learn from another email, is funding ISIS, or at least Hillary Clinton believes so.

Did Russia write that $1 million check?

John ruberry
John “Lee” Ruberry of the Magnificent Seven

Also learned from those purported emails was that there was an anti-Catholic email exchange between Podesta, Jennifer Palmieri, communications director of the campaign, and John Halpin of the leftist Center for American Progress. If the trio had discussing Islam in the same manner, they’d almost certainly be looking for new jobs now.

And those revelations are just the ones on the top of the Podesta email pile.

But a couple of media outlets, probably more, apparently believe that by questioning the legitimacy of these alleged emails, people may doubt their veracity.

I don’t think it’s going to work. Not this time. We’re not as dumb as the media elites believe.

John Ruberry regularly blogs at Marathon Pundit.

What Donald Trump said about women is indefensible. What Hillary Clinton has done is even more indefensible.

Take her time, for example, as secretary of state. Clinton had one major accomplishment during her tenure: she traveled a lot.

As Foreign Affairs put it when Clinton stepped down in 2013, “She leaves office without a signature doctrine, strategy or diplomatic triumph.”

That’s a kind assessment. In fact, she left a lot of wreckage during her four years in office.

One of the more troubling is U.S. relations with Russia.

Most Americans would blame Russian President Vladimir Putin for our poor relations, but he only maneuvered as a result of the weakness of U.S. policy.

Syria has been part of the Russia sphere of influence, starting during the 1960s. If the United States wasn’t going to intervene, it needed to quickly discuss the situation with Putin. Clinton didn’t seek out the Russians, leaving her successor, John Kerry, to mess up the situation even more.

Whatever happened to the Russian reset Clinton and Obama talked so much about?

The Russian leader, like his predecessors, seized on weaknesses. The absence of clear American failure in the Middle East sent Putin a message that he could do whatever he wanted to do in Ukraine.

Now he has reportedly started to move nuclear weapons to Kaliningrad, a Russian outpost sandwiched between Poland and Lithuania. The reason? To establish Russian hegemony over the Baltic Sea.

Masha Gessen, who wrote a biography of Putin, dispels a number of myths in a recent column:

–Putin has not thrown his support behind Trump. The Russian leader has only mentioned the GOP nominee in passing. It is true Putin does not like Hillary because he blames her for inciting demonstrations against him in 2011-2014.

–Putin has not made Russia great again. The oil glut has taxed people’s income, and crime has become rampant in major cities.

–Russians do not overwhelmingly support Putin. His approval ratings are high, but the rest of the government, which rubber stamps his policies, get low marks.

–Russian society is not conservative. People have quite liberal views on abortion and sex.

–Russia’s policies are not simply a reaction to U.S. policies. Russia acts in its own self-interest as it it in Crimea.

Here is the column: http://tinyurl.com/hnxjsx4

The next president needs a serious reset with Putin. He’s tough and smart. He’s hardly the caricature the media use to portray him. He’s a leader of one of the most important countries in the world, and the United States needs to figure out a way to discuss the relationship between the two countries. Clinton has certainly failed to do that.

If Clinton is elected president, she will start with two major enemies: China and Russia. If Trump is elected, at least he would start out with only one, China, and the possibility of restoring some sense of order with Russia.


Christopher Harper, a recovering journalist with The Associated Press, Newsweek, ABC News and The Washington Times, teaches media law.

 

 

 

It’s 9 am on Monday, I’ve had 2 hours sleep in the last 26 hours (counting 20 & 10 minute catnaps at work during breaks) and I was all ready to happily crash until I saw this from veteran reporter Bob Schieffer at Newsbusters:

How have we come to this?

That answer is quite simple.  You did this.

  • In 1992 the media decided to ignore the evidence of Bill Clinton’s actions when he ran for the White House
  • When the president of the United States was hitting on twenty something interns in the White House and getting blowjobs in the oval office the media decided it was “just sex”.
  • When the president of the United States lied about this under oath and was investigated for it, the media called it a “witch hunt” and called special prosecutor Ken Starr’s actions “puritanical”.
  • When the president finally was impeached over this the media attacked the GOP for doing so rather than the president for his actions.
  • When one of the women accused him of rape and a NBC reporter actually decided to cover the story, they held it so said facts wouldn’t affect the president’s trial. 
  • When said president left office the media pretended that none of these actions by said president, all of which would preclude a person from a job in corporate america under sexual harassment law, existed and lionized said ex-president.

And I haven’t even mentioned the media spending months spinning away and ignoring the Clinton emails scandals, Benghazi et/all

Then when finally someone calls them out publicly over this (and the double standards as to how conservatives have been treated) you have the temerity to ask:  How did we come to this?

But DaTechGuy you say, what about Trump?  Well you can take a bow there too

  • This same media that has had a fit over Donald Trump’s remarks has spent the last three decades fighting a war in the culture against  traditional values and the Judeo Christian culture that supports them while elevating vulgarity, narcissism and Lasciviousness as virtues.
  • The same media that attacks Donald Trump  over his business dealing and his actions and words concerning women elevated the same type of attacks on Mitt Romney and John McCain to the point where such attacks are meaningless.
  • The same media that attacks Donald Trump as a populist extremist and is appalled that such a man would be nominated spent the last decade labeling senators like Ted Cruz, governors like Sarah Palin and Scott Walker and members of the House like Michelle Bachmann and Allen West who wanted to address issues like our open borders, islamic terrorist, black on black violence in the cities and the 2nd amendment rights of the people as dangerous extremists and racists encouraging the GOP to attack them and praising them when they did, leaving the voters who care about these issues nowhere to go within the normal party structure.

Bottom line How DARE you insult our intelligence by decrying the state of our republic when you and your media allies by a combination of enabling Bill and Hillary Clinton at every opportunity for decades while marginalizing any pol who dared address the concerns of the center right of the nation and attacking their culture at every turn have done all you could to bring about this result?


If you’d like to help support independent non MSM journalism and opinion please consider hitting DaTipJar




Olimometer 2.52

Please consider Subscribing. Right now our subscribers consist of 1/50 of 1% of our total unique visitors based on last years numbers.

If we can get another 150 subscribers at $10 a month (another 1/10 of 1% of those who have visited this year) We can meet our annual goals with no trouble, with the same number of subscribers at $20 a month I could afford to cover the presidential campaign outside of New England firsthand.

And of course at that price you get the Da Magnificent Seven plus those we hope to add on and all subscribers get my weekly podcast emailed directly to you before it goes up anywhere else.


Choose a Subscription level



By John Ruberry

The Washington Post has long been a leftist publication, in the 1970s it was dubbed “Pravda on the Potomac” by conservatives.

The newspaper has gotten worse since then, even after its purchase in 2013 by Amazon founder Jeff Bezos.

On Friday it released a 2005 video of Donald Trump in a hot-mic conversation with Billy Bush of Access Hollywood as he very crudely discusses his sexual moves on women. In his apology the Republican presidential nominee categorized his behavior as “locker-room banter,” but the reality is that most men, or even high school sophomores, don’t speak in that manner about women, at least in such explicit detail. Trump needs to make one more apology added with a vow never to discuss women in that fashion for as long as he lives.

While NBC, which owns Access Hollywood, not surprisingly had the video clip first, it was cognizant of it on Monday. But while the network’s lawyers were still reviewing the clip, an anonymous source alerted the Post about it on Friday, four hours later it went live on the newspaper’s website.

But who was that source?

In a July Wikileaks release, Greg Sargent, who writes the Plum Line blog for the Post–most of the its blogs are leftist electronic rags–was exposed as a shill for the Democratic National Committee. Lee Cary in the American Thinker laid down how the DNC propaganda treadmill works at the Post. Sargent gets a tip of slanted information from the DNC, which of course he doesn’t credit in his blog entry. Writers higher up on the Post food chain credit the Plum Line on this “scoop,” other media sources credit the Post, when in fact the “news” is really a disguised Democratic Party informercial.

How many other shills such as Sargent at the Post have yet to be exposed?

“According to the Washington Post” is a much more convincing article lead-in than “According to a Democratic Party press release.”

John "Lee" Ruberry of the Magnificent Seven
John “Lee” Ruberry of the Magnificent Seven

Back to the Trump tape. Yes, it’s newsworthy, but if the DNC was the Post’s source, shouldn’t its readers know about that? Remember, there’s a conveyor line of information coming from the Democrats to the Washington Post. Here’s another question: Let’s say a similarly damaging recording of Hillary Clinton was out there and the Post became aware of it. Would the Post run with that story? Or does the paper ignore it, using feeble excuses that it is “old news” or “not relevant to the political discussion.”

Win or lose this autumn, conservative bloggers and activists need to widen the battlefield and include what Trump rightly calls the “dishonest media” in the war for America. The establishment media, with a few exceptions, is a leftist cabal. If we successfully expose them to the masses, we’ll discover that defeating the Democrats will be surprisingly easy.

Don’t worry about Greg Sargent. I’m sure he has a job waiting for him at the Democratic National Committee if things stop working out for him at the Post. Or in a Hillary Clinton presidential administration.

John Ruberry regularly blogs Marathon Pundit.

Unless somebody is actually paying me, I don’t watch televised debates. I visit the candidates’ websites, compare how they stand on the issues, decide on my own, and spare myself the aggravation of wasting hours of my life watching televised debates.

Yes, you can take for granted that the so-called moderators, products of liberal schools of journalism-in-name-only, will favor the Dems. The cable and TV networks are not as bare-faced as Univision’s activists, but sometimes they come close.

And don’t get me started on the unasked questions, especially the unasked question so far,

“You say you are ‘personally opposed’ to abortion, can you explain your reason for personally oppose abortion?”

So last night I watched instead Luke Cage, starring the fine-looking, fine-sounding Mike Colter. I knew nothing about the series, but it looked interesting when it came up on Netflix, so I watched.

Reading about the debate this morning, I’m glad I did, considering that Tim Kaine reportedly interrupted Mike Pence over seventy times. The video posted with that article shows Kaine, lifted eyebrow, finger pointed, yammering on about whatever came to mind, which may or may not be related to what Pence was saying, with little, if any interaction from the moderator.

If this sounds like an exaggeration, look at a brief section of the transcript, where Hillary’s servers, the Clinton Foundation, The Apprentice, Osama Bin Laden, Iran and Iraq swirled around in an alphabet soup,

PENCE: But there’s a — there’s a reason why people question the trustworthiness of Hillary Clinton. And that’s because they’re paying attention. I mean, the reality is, when she was secretary of state, Senator, come on. She had a Clinton Foundation accepting contributions from foreign governments.

KAINE: You are Donald Trump’s apprentice. Let me talk about this…

(CROSSTALK)

PENCE: Senator, I think I’m still on my time.

KAINE: Well, I think — isn’t this a discussion?

QUIJANO: This is our open discussion.

KAINE: Yeah, let’s talk about the state of…

(CROSSTALK)

PENCE: Well, let me interrupt — let me interrupt you and finish my sentence, if I can.

KAINE: Finish your sentence.

PENCE: The Clinton Foundation accepted foreign contributions from foreign governments and foreign donors while she was secretary of state.

KAINE: OK, now I can weigh in. Now…

PENCE: She had a private server…

KAINE: Now, I get to weigh in. Now, let me just say this…

PENCE: … that was discovered…

(CROSSTALK)

QUIJANO: … Senator, you have an opportunity to respond.

PENCE: … keep that pay to play process out of the reach of the public.

KAINE: Governor Pence — Governor Pence doesn’t think the world’s going so well and he, you know, is going to say it’s everybody’s fault.

PENCE: Do you?

KAINE: Let me tell you this. When Hillary Clinton became secretary of state, Governor Pence, did you know that Osama bin Laden was alive?

PENCE: Yes.

KAINE: Do you know that we had 175,000 troops deployed in the battlefield in Iraq and Afghanistan? Do you know that Iran was racing toward a nuclear weapon and Russia was expanding its stockpile?

Under Secretary Clinton’s leadership, she was part of the national team, public safety team that went after and revived the dormant hunt against bin Laden and wiped him off the face of the Earth. She worked to deal with the Russians to reduce their chemical weapons stockpile. She worked a tough negotiation with nations around the world to eliminate the Iranian nuclear weapons program without firing a shot.

PENCE: Eliminate the Iranian nuclear weapons program?

KAINE: Absolutely, without firing a shot. And instead of 175,000 American troops deployed overseas, we now have 15,000.

PENCE: Right and…

KAINE: These are very, very good things.

PENCE: And Iraq has been overrun by ISIS, because Hillary Clinton failed to renegotiate…

KAINE: Well, if you want to put more American troops in Iraq, you can propose that.

PENCE: Hillary Clinton — Hillary Clinton — Hillary Clinton failed to renegotiate a status of forces agreement…

KAINE: No, that is incorrect. That’s incorrect.

PENCE: And so we removed — we removed all of our…

QUIJANO: Gentlemen, we’ll get to…

(CROSSTALK)

PENCE: … troops from Iraq, and ISIS was able to be conjured up in that vacuum.

KAINE: But I’d like to correct…

PENCE: … and overrun vast areas of Iraq.

Where was the moderator? Who knows? Fifty more minutes of that followed.

So you can understand why I prefer to watch the more handsome and entertaining Mr. Colter, whose character is named after Luke 4:18. Here’s the Gospel text in context,

14 Jesus returned to Galilee in the power of the Spirit, and news about him spread through the whole countryside. 15 He was teaching in their synagogues, and everyone praised him.16 He went to Nazareth, where he had been brought up, and on the Sabbath day he went into the synagogue, as was his custom. He stood up to read, 17 and the scroll of the prophet Isaiah was handed to him. Unrolling it, he found the place where it is written:

18 “The Spirit of the Lord is on me,
because he has anointed me
to proclaim good news to the poor.
He has sent me to proclaim freedom for the prisoners
and recovery of sight for the blind,
to set the oppressed free,
19 to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favor.”[f]

The greater lesson, for both Luke Cage and for debate viewers alike, remains, from Psalm 146:3-5 (emphasis added),

3 Put not your trust in princes, nor in the son of man, in whom there is no help.

4 His breath goeth forth, he returneth to his earth; in that very day his thoughts perish.

5 Happy is he that hath the God of Jacob for his help, whose hope is in the Lord his God:

No televised debate will change that.

Fausta Rodriguez Wertz writes on U.S. and Latin American politics, news, and culture at Fausta’s Blog.

By John Ruberry

Last night the New York Times, using an illegally obtained copy of Donald Trump’s 1995 tax return, speculated that because of a $916 million loss listed on that return, the Republican nominee may have, yes, may have, avoided paying federal income taxes for 18 years.

With help from his wealthy father, not the government, Trump, a real estate developer, built an international business empire. And because of his Apprentice television franchise, even before his presidential run Trump was likely the most recognized business person in the United States.

Hillary Clinton is also rich. Her business–make that racket–is influence peddling. While her husband was attorney general, and then governor of Arkansas, Clinton was an attorney at the Rose Law Firm in that state’s capital city. The Clintons, aided by the Rose Law Firm, used its clout to protect themselves and Jim and Susan McDougal, their investment partners. While they didn’t make money in Whitewater, Arkansas’ first couple did their best to cover up the Whitewater scandal, which led to the convictions the McDougals, Bill’s successor as governor, and Webster Hubbell, a partner at the Rose Law Firm and a close friend of the Clintons.arkansas-sign

The McDougals ran Madison Guaranty Savings and Loan in Little Rock, which failed in the 1980s. They chose, of course, the Rose Law Firm to defend their thrift.

After emerging from the White House “dead broke,” the Clintons were still able to purchase a mansion in Westchester County, New York, one of the most expensive real estate markets in the nation. In 2001 the Clinton Foundation was formed, by this time of course Hillary was a US Senator from New York. The foundation traded off of Bill’s status as an ex-president–six-figure public speaking fees to him went to this “charity,” which offered high-priced salaries to Clinton family cronies and served as a lucrative waiting room for those Clintonistas between government jobs.

The former first couple learned that influence peddling, not property investments, was their pathway to wealth.

While Hillary was serving as Barack Obama’s secretary of state, foreign donors poured money into the “charity,” probably using their cash as down payments for favors from Madame Secretary. It worked. A majority of the non-governmental meetings Hillary had at State were with Clinton Foundation donors, which is why the foundation is commonly referred to as a slush fund.

In Illinois, where Hillary grew up, that’s called pay-to-play.

John ruberry
John “Lee” Ruberry of the Magnificent Seven

There’s nothing like this type of sordidness in Trump’s background.

After leaving State, it was Hillary’s turn to collect the big-money speeches, with Wall Street firms being some of her most lucrative clients. Without having been a major government figure–or the spouse of one–Clinton’s speech income just might have matched that of a Times Square busker, such as the Naked Cowboy.

In 2014 just 5.7 percent of the Clinton Foundation budget was spent on charitable grants.

Where is that story, New York Times?

Oh, do you know anyone who doesn’t try to pay as little income tax as possible?

John Ruberry regularly blogs at Marathon Pundit.

 

 

screen-shot-2016-09-17-at-9-27-55-am

My friend has become a Facebook rock star after he posted a video of his trigger warning for his editing class at Loyola University in Baltimore.

The post got nearly three million page views.

“I have been giving a trigger warning on the first day of class every semester. This is it: This is going to be a difficult class,” said professor John McIntyre, who also works as an editor at The Baltimore Sun, “and I must say, it is incumbent on me to tell you, this course is unrelievedly, thoroughly, appallingly dull.”

At a time when college campuses have become littered with trigger warnings and safe zones, McIntyre’s captured the essence of the debate over the idiotic tilt of university life.

“Part of what is going to be difficult in this class is that if you are like the 700 or so students who have preceded you here, you are wobbly in English grammar and usage,” McIntyre said. He blamed the educational system for either not teaching the subject or blowing it badly. Repetition, he argued, was the key to learning how to use language.

McIntyre added this final point: “One of the reasons you are in a university is to experience different personality types, different senses of humor, different approaches to the word. I am not the only jackass you will ever encounter in your adult working life. Use this semester as an opportunity to polish your coping skills.”

See the entire video at https://www.facebook.com/baltimoresun/videos

His video got noticed by The Huffington Post, Buzzfeed and Teen Vogue. Each of them also noted the negative comments about the video. Here’s how McIntyre responded to his critics:

“I am considering a form response to non-serious negative comments:

Having read your comment, John McIntyre expresses his sympathy for your disability:

□ Lack of a sense of humor

□ Propensity to rash, superficial judgments

□ Assumption of facts not in evidence

□ Incapacity for civil discourse.”

Rock on, John!


A personal note: I had a minor rock star moment when I was inducted recently into the Iowa Music Association Rock ‘n’ Roll Hall of Fame. Take a look at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EGpou67Yahw


Christopher Harper, a recovering journalist with The Associated Press, Newsweek, ABC News and The Washington Times, teaches media law. Read more at www.mediamashup.org


It was a bad sunday for the MSM.

After Hillary Clinton’s health scare just after the Sunday shows last week there was a distinct change in the polling as Jazz Shaw reports:

The hated conclusion that Trump may actually be winning is showing up in a variety of unusual places, such as the LA Times daily tracking poll. This one has bounced around quite a bit, but Trump hasn’t had a solid lead in it since the GOP convention. Now he’s up by seven, well beyond the margin of error.

Trump has been leading there since 9/11. Is this a coincidence or does it have something to do with public perceptions of Clinton’s health after that ill fated “stumble” (read: collapse) outside the memorial service? She’s taken a nose dive since then and the latest report from Morning Consult finds that voters have been paying attention. They increasingly believe that Clinton is sick and are worried about it.

This could not be allowed to stand and the MSM was desperate to change the subject. They decided the plan was to bring back the birther issue that nobody was talking about or even thinking about because even if you think that Barack Obama was born in Kenya (or as I think he was born in Hawaii but pulled a Elizabeth Warren for personal advantage.) he has only 4 months left in office so who cares?

But the MSM, trying to energize the black vote that doesn’t like or trust Hillary Clinton and desperate to persuade millennials that Donald Trump is so beyond the pale that they MUST turn out to stop him, decided the birther business was the way to go and suddenly it became the subject of the week.

Yeah Donald Trump managed to rick roll them a few days ago but the Sunday shows belong to the left and they were ready to go all out on Trump the Birther, Trump the Bigot and Trump the inciter of violence or as Reliable Sources played it Trump the con man. The press was chomping at the bit and Dem VP Candidate Tim Kaine was ready to hit every show to emphasize that meme.

And then this happened in NYC:

Police are hunting for answers on what caused an explosion that injured 29 people in New York’s Chelsea neighborhood, shortly before a second suspicious device was found nearby.

New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio told reporters early indications are that the explosion at 23rd Street and 6th Avenue in Manhattan at about 8.30 p.m. Saturday “was an intentional act.”

And this happened in NJ:

In addition to the bomb that exploded about 9:30 a.m., some authorities reported finding as many as three other intact devices along the runners’ route on Ocean Avenue. The blast occurred in a trash can at the corner of D Street. Authorities later said the reports of additional devices were not verified.

Homeland Security, FBI, and U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms & Explosives agents joined New Jersey State Police, the Ocean County Prosecutor’s Office, the Ocean County Sheriff’s Office, and Seaside Park Police, blocking access to Seaside Park while an intense search was conducted.

And this happened in Minnesota:

Mass Stabbing at Mall in St. Cloud, Minnesota: Suspect Asked Victims if They Were Muslim

And of course ISIS celebrated:

Supporters of the Islamic State rushed to celebrate Saturday night’s powerful explosion in New York’s Chelsea neighborhood that injured at least 29 people, even as no group or individual has been arrested or claimed responsibility.

“The lions of the Caliphate roar in New York, we cause you pain inside your house, the carrier of the Cross,” wrote one Twitter user who went by the name “I am ISIS, come and block me.” The account was soon suspended. Another, called “The Lone Wolves,” tweeted with the Arabic hashtag #ExplosionManhattanNewYork “Oh God burn America, take revenge in the name of your oppressed slaves and believers’ blood.”

Undaunted and unbowed every single sunday show talked the birther stuff (most conveniently ignoring the Blumenthal angle) and kept pushing a “Trump off the rails again” meme while giving a few minutes during their opening about the NY & NJ bombings and Meet the Press did mention the stabbings in Minn.  Doing their best to stress that they don’t know if it’s terror.

The people’s Cube answered them well:

I’m sure the MSM was very pleased with themselves with their digs on Trump, in fact Brian Stelter did a whole self-righteous segment on “Why doesn’t the public trust us” that was all about hitting Trump. Alas for him Jake Tapper who started the day challenging Tim Kaine on Blumenthal and birtherism, followed him on cnn talking terror including the attacks in Minnesota, #ChelseaNYC continues to trend on twitter, a live press conference on the NY Bombing was carried by the networks reducing the Birther stuff to irrelevancy.

As Jazz Shaw put the meme changing nature of these attacks in perspective

None of these stories taken by themselves are going to generate the sort of headlines that a major terror attack produces, primarily because we got lucky and nobody died. But if we examine the pattern and put it in the context of the times we live in, it’s not exactly a stretch to imagine that there’s a connecting thread. That’s not to say that everyone involved in each incident was coordinating their efforts. In fact, that seems highly unlikely. But if the word was put out on the terror gossip lines that this would be a good weekend to kill some Americans, it doesn’t take all that much for someone to grab a knife or load up some steel pipes with gunpowder and head on out.

But what was the message the media wanted to take from all of this? When Donald Trump was kicking off a planned rally he used the phrase “a bomb went off” at the beginning of his remarks and reporters went ballistic over how he was rushing to judgement. For the record, I was also holding out for the possibility that it might have been a gas line or steam pipe explosion in New York last night, but was it really such a crazy idea to suspect it was a bomb? Particularly when it turned out to be a bomb?

And we didn’t even talk about the ambush of police in Philly.

Bottom line, The MSM and the Hillary Campaign had a bad Sunday because reality once again undermined the message they wanted to advance.


If you like what you see here and want to help cover these costs and others please consider hitting DaTipjar. I promise not to pull a Hillary and keep charging you behind your back.




Olimometer 2.52

Please consider Subscribing. Right now our subscribers consist of 1/50 of 1% of our total unique visitors based on last years numbers.

If we can get another 150 subscribers at $10 a month (another 1/10 of 1% of those who have visited this year) We can meet our annual goals with no trouble, with the same number of subscribers at $20 a month I could afford to cover the presidential campaign outside of New England firsthand.

And of course at that price you get the Da Magnificent Seven plus those we hope to add on and all subscribers get my weekly podcast emailed directly to you before it goes up anywhere else.


Choose a Subscription level



Keep your eye clear, and hit ’em where they ain’t

Willie Keeler

Four Years and six months ago I was in NH for a NRO event along with a lot of other bloggers and reporters after all of us watched one of the GOP primary debates that was notable for George Stephanopoulos suddenly asking Mitt Romney a question about contraception that had everyone, including Romney scratching their heads. It had not been an issue in the campaign nor in the country or years and while Roman Catholics will tell you artificial contraception is a sin to my knowledge Mormons have no problem with it.

That night everyone was talking about how weird the question but a few days later things became clear as the entire media jumped on this as an important issue.

You see many things were going badly in the economy, in foreign affairs and the folly of Obamacare were just starting to become apparent, the Democrats needed a distraction to protect the president so they pivoted bringing out an issue that had been settled for years to change the submit and hit republicans at the same time.

It’s sort of like the tactic used against Ted Williams in the 40’s called the Williams Shift repositioning players completely to change the dynamic of his hitting.

tedwilliamsshift It the same tactic used against David Ortiz today in an attempt to make those hits come with a little more difficulty.

While both Williams and Ortiz had occasional failures against the shift, in the end their skill levels were/are so superior that the shift could not stop them from hitting through it and as both demonstrated regularly if the ball is off the wall or out of the park no amount of shifting is going to make any difference.

Alas for the GOP Mitt Romney was no Ted Williams or David Ortiz. Romney being Romney and the GOP being the GOP, they fell hook line and sinker for this nonsense hitting directly into the shift and giving the media exactly what they wanted. It was one of a series of foolish and timid moves that turned what should have been a very easy election for the GOP into the disaster that the next four years of Barack Obama became.

Fast forward to 2016. Hillary Clinton has had the worst week in the history of history, the attempt to portray health questions as a conspiracy theory have failed. Leak after leak makes her look bad. The polls have gone south, Trump has bested her in a televised forum and thanks to his new campaign team has not only avoided mistakes but gotten positive press and cultural coverage that even playing the David Duke card has not been able to counter and if that’s not bad enough ISIS continues to advance, the refugee crisis continues to fester and Obamacare exchanges are dropping like flies What does one do if you are the palace guard for Democrats mainstream media?

Why you play the “shift” card and trot out birtherism.

The fact that Barack Obama has barely four months in office and that it’s an issue that nobody cares about doesn’t matter. The media needs to change the subject so suddenly the entire press corps decides there is no bigger issue to settle and they will not stop asking about it until Trump satisfies them.

In other words the shift is on and they are daring Trump to hit it over or through them counting on the fact that despite his media skills he is not enough of a Ted Williams or David Ortiz to successfully hit through the shift.

But while it’s true that Donald Trump is no Williams or Ortiz, he’s also no Mitt Romney and his new campaign team of Breitbart’s Stephen Bannon and Kelly Conway are not the normal GOP consultants advising him to hit into the shift and take their chances.

Instead Trump announced a press conference to address the issue, the MSM rushed to cover it live (something that they have been a lot less enthusiastic to do since he became the nominee) ready to take his statement and pound him with question after question, furthermore as he was apparently “running late” they continued to promote the event to ensure the maximum viewership when he did make his statement…

…and then this happened

The media found themselves giving their audience 20 minutes of military heroes endorsing Trump on live TV before he finally came on Camera to say

“Hillary Clinton and her campaign of 2008 started the birther controversy. I finished it.”

Not only did Trump get the media to cover his endorsements but he got them to cover live his pronouncement that “birtherism” was a construct of the Hillary Clinton campaign. (a Statement spin not withstanding backed up by on CNN by a Clinton campaign manager but by a respected veteran journalist former McClatchy Washington Bureau Chief James Asher.

A story repeated on the McClatchy site yesterday

“During the 2008 Democratic primary, Sid Blumenthal visited the Washington Bureau of McClatchy Co.,” Asher said in an email Friday to McClatchy, noting that he was at the time the investigative editor and in charge of Africa coverage.

“During that meeting, Mr. Blumenthal and I met together in my office and he strongly urged me to investigate the exact place of President Obama’s birth, which he suggested was in Kenya. We assigned a reporter to go to Kenya, and that reporter determined that the allegation was false.

“At the time of Mr. Blumenthal’s conversation with me, there had been a few news articles published in various outlets reporting on rumors about Obama’s birthplace. While Mr. Blumenthal offered no concrete proof of Obama’s Kenyan birth, I felt that, as journalists, we had a responsibility to determine whether or not those rumors were true. They were not.”

Blumenthal, who worked in the White House with President Bill Clinton and later was employed by the Clinton Foundation, could not be reached Friday but said in an email to The Boston Globe, “This is false. Period.”

In other words the Trump campaign instead of hitting into the shift as he might have been inclined under the old management team, poked the ball into the empty left field for an easy double.

The fit this gave the entire MSM was epic which comes from a single miscalculation.

You don’t have to be a David Ortiz or a Ted Williams to beat the shift, you just have to be good enough to go the other way and hit the ball where they ain’t.

And Trump is.

Update: Don Surber adds a bit of Irony:

For a decade, the city wanted the grand post office turned into a hotel. Trump did it. Today was the opening of the hotel. That was the reason for the event — not to discuss birtherism, which was the Clinton Camp’s topic of the day.


If you like what you see here and want to help cover these costs and others please consider hitting DaTipjar. I promise not to pull a Hillary and keep charging you without your consent.




Olimometer 2.52

Please consider Subscribing. Right now our subscribers consist of 1/50 of 1% of our total unique visitors based on last years numbers.

If we can get another 150 subscribers at $10 a month (another 1/10 of 1% of those who have visited this year) We can meet our annual goals with no trouble, with the same number of subscribers at $20 a month I could afford to cover the presidential campaign outside of New England firsthand.

And of course at that price you get the Da Magnificent Seven plus those we hope to add on and all subscribers get my weekly podcast emailed directly to you before it goes up anywhere else.


Choose a Subscription level



by baldilocksBaldilocks mini

It will be interesting tomorrow to see whether Sit-Down fever has spread across the ranks of the NFL. Allegedly, some of the Miami Dolphins are thinking about it.

Dolphin players may also have something in the works, but it appears to be on an individual basis.“Every man for himself, I guess. Each his own,” said Dolphins safety Reshad Jones.

“Everybody have different opinions and entitled to different things.

This thing has pinged my paranoia streak—like so many other Tempests have.

Just a few days ago, the president of NAACP compared Colin Kaepernick’s stance to that of Rosa Parks.

Aside from the fact that Kaepernick was protected from physical danger by various levels of professional security when he took his stand, while Mrs. Parks had no security when she refused to give up her seat to a fellow bus passenger who was white,

And aside from the fact that Kaepernick was on his job when he took his stand and Mrs. Parks was not,

And aside from the fact that Mrs. Parks’ taxes paid for the Montgomery, AL municipal bus service, while Kaepernick is being paid to be present and to perform at the platform where he has and will make his statement,

There’s something which I wonder about the two events, something which may be a true similarity.

Rosa Parks did not spontaneously refuse to give up her seat. She was planted. There was another black woman who refused to give up her Montgomery bus seat to a white person and who went to court to fight the injustice. But she didn’t have to right reputation for the task at hand, according to the civil right organizations of the time. The task, of course, was to end the segregation of public services–to fight true inequality and oppression.

Few people know the story of Claudette Colvin: When she was 15, she refused to move to the back of the bus and give up her seat to a white person — nine months before Rosa Parks did the very same thing.

Most people know about Parks and the Montgomery, Ala., bus boycott that began in 1955, but few know that there were a number of women who refused to give up their seats on the same bus system. Most of the women were quietly fined, and no one heard much more.

Colvin was the first to really challenge the law.

paranoidsmile_768
No, I’m not paranoid. Why do you ask?

To tarnish Mrs. Parks’ place in history is not my purpose. This is: I wonder if Kaepernick was planted. There are other players who have intentionally remained seated during the National Anthem, but he is the first to get such widespread attention.

Who told Colin Kaepernick to sit down? Rumor has it that it was his alleged girlfriend, a Black Lives Matter activist. But I bet it came from higher up. Or lower, depending on one’s perspective.

I don’t take anything for granted anymore–especially when figures in media and entertainment are attempting to rile up Americans against each other.

Juliette Akinyi Ochieng blogs at baldilocks. (Her older blog is located here.) Her first novel, Tale of the Tigers: Love is Not a Game, was published in 2012. Her second novel will be done in 2016. Follow her on Twitter.

Please contribute to Juliette’s JOB:  Her new novel, her blog, her Internet to keep the latter going and COFFEE to keep her going!

Or hit Da Tech Guy’s Tip Jar in the name of Independent Journalism—->>>>>

You hadn’t exactly gone out of your way to call attention to them had you? I mean like actually telling anyone or anything.’ But the plans were on display…’ o n display? I eventually had to go down to the cellar to find them.’ `That’s the display department.’ `With a torch.’ `Ah, well the lights had probably gone.’ `So had the stairs.’ `But look you found the notice didn’t you?’ `Yes,’ said Arthur, `yes I did. It was on display in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying “Beware of The Leopard”.’

Douglas Adams The Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy 1979 — Douglas Adams.

On Tuesday I led with a piece concerning the hilarity of crying “security” with Anthony Weiner and Huma when Bill Clinton is about to be let back into the white house. In that piece I had a quote from Donny Deutsch

Panelist Donny Deutsch guessed that Trump would have no problem counter-punching with the Epstein connection whenever he was hit for his own behavior with women, as he was last weekend in a piece in the New York Times.

“Here’s the tennis game,” Deutsch said. “Donald Trump kissed a woman in a bathing suit. Trump hits back: Tell me about the president’s relationship with a guy named Jeffrey Epstein. That’s your tennis match.”

In my original piece I had video from the Washington Free Beacon story containing that entire exchange. You might wonder why I didn’t include said video of Deutsch mentioning Jeffery Epstein and see the reaction of the people at the table.

Here is why

nbc copywright

If you look at the view count you will see that seven minute clip had over 100,000 views before NBC decided to play copyright police game.

Maybe it’s just me but given how often we see stuff at mediaite et al it seems rather unusual for a news network to make a copyright claim over a clip from a news story that used as “fair use” by another news organization. Could this suggest that NBC wants to keep this clip out of the public view because it might hurt Hillary?

I can see the NBC reaction now: Nonsense, we’re not censoring the clip at all. The seven minute clip IS available IF you

Go to the Morning Joe site

Hit search taking you to the MSNBC search engine

Search for Donald Trump

Narrow the field to Morning Joe

Narrow the field to May 16th 2016

and sit through all the videos till you find the right one.

And skip ahead to the 12 minute mark on that video.

If you do so you CAN find the clip and watch the Morning Joe panel’s reaction to what Donny Deutsch says

So,  You’ll have absolutely no problem sharing this clip with people far and wide and giving them a hint about the relationship between Jeffery Epstein and Bill Clinton and how the media views it…provided you are someone like me who

already saw the clip

remembered what show it was on

knew what day it was broadcast

And knew what time segment to look for 

As for everyone else NBC says to you: Beware of the Leopard!


If you like what you see here please consider hitting DaTipjar




Olimometer 2.52

Please consider Subscribing. Right now our subscribers consist of 1/50 of 1% of our total unique visitors based on last years numbers.

If we can get another 150 subscribers at $10 a month (another 1/10 of 1% of those who have visited this year) We can meet our annual goals with no trouble, with the same number of subscribers at $20 a month I could afford to cover the presidential campaign outside of New England firsthand.

And of course at that price you get the Da Magnificent Seven plus those we hope to add on and all subscribers get my weekly podcast emailed directly to you before it goes up anywhere else.


Choose a Subscription level



and if you want to fight the MSM company store join the Have Fedora Will Travel pledge drive to send me to cover Donald Trump on the road

Street gang temple, Chicago's South Side
Street gang temple,
Chicago’s South Side

By John Ruberry

This morning on Fox News Donald Trump spokesman Ben Carson said, “If we are going to make America great we cannot have large pockets of dysfunction.”

Carson was responding to questions about the latest mainstream media tantrum about the Republican nominee Tweeting about Friday the murder of Nykea Aldridge in a violent Chicago neighborhood, the cousin of Chicago Bulls player and longtime all-star Dwayne Wade, where he indelicately predicted a groundswell of support for his campaign.

But as I remarked in this space a month ago, Trump is the first Republican presidential nominee in memory to make a concerted effort to appeal to black voters and he correctly points out that the Democratic Party, whom African Americans have reflexively voted for en masse since the 1930s, is failing inner city blacks. A few days before Aldridge murder Trump was offered this statement by Fox News’ Bill O’Reilly, “Did you know that murders in Chicago are up 50 percent this year from last year? And they can’t solve it.”CoJCZVfUMAAMJlm

The political newcomer replied, likely correctly, that the wrong people are in charge in Chicago and based on a conservation that the political newcomer had with an unnamed senior Chicago police officer, that violence in America’s third largest city could end in a week. Okay, that’s a major piece of hyperbole, there will always be some violence everywhere. What police department is able to prevent an angry person who hits a spouse over the head with a frying pan during an argument in their kitchen? On the other hand, a noticeable drop in Chicago violence of course is a possible, and of course, a desirable goal.

Detroit hasn’t had a Republican mayor since 1963. Chicago hasn’t had a Republican mayor since 1933. Both are dominated by “large pockets of dysfunction.” Some Chicago politicians have a cozy relationship with street gang leaders.

It took a Republican, Rudy Giuliani, to turn around New York City, which was believed to be ungovernable prior to his two terms as mayor.

John Ruberry regularly blogs at Marathon Pundit.

A woman in the Kurdish military recently shot and killed a senior commander of the self-proclaimed Islamic State who once kept her as a sex slave.

After more than 50 people at a Kurdish wedding died in an attack by Islamic terrorists, Turkey finally decided this week to launch a serious assault against the self-proclaimed Islamic State.

The incidents underline the importance of the Kurds as a key ally in any successful attempt to rid the world of the radical Islamists.

When I arrived in the Middle East nearly 40 years ago, the Armenians and the Kurds were among the most downtrodden ethnic groups in the region. The Armenians have their own country now; the Kurds don’t but should.

In one of the most brutal results of map drawing before and after World War I, more than 30 million Kurds were split among four countries: Iraq, Iran, Syria and Turkey. Keep in mind, most Kurds, who are mainly Sunni, consider themselves Kurds, not Iraqis, Iranians, Syrians or Turks. An independent state would be one of the largest in the Middle East–bigger than Syrian and almost as big as Iraq.

The Kurds have faced adversity many times, including the horrific 1988 chemical attack by Saddam Hussein’s government that left thousands dead in the worst incident of its kind in history.

The Kurds have supported the United States on many occasions, including the Gulf War, the Iraq War and the Syrian Civil War—much of the time later being forsaken by the Americans.

The Kurdish forces are called the pesh merga, which translated means “one who faces death.” This army has driven out Islamists from a variety of their strongholds in Iraq and Syria.

The U.S. government has thrown billions of dollars at a variety of ineffective Middle Eastern armies, but it has only been recently that the Kurds have received money for small arms shipments.

The United States should fund the pesh merga to a much greater extent because it is the only effective fighting force against the Islamic State.

Perhaps it’s time for the U.S. government to consider an independent Kurdish state in at least parts of Iraq and Syria, where it could continue its support of America.


Christopher Harper, a longtime journalist with The Associated Press, Newsweek, ABC News and The Washington Times, teaches media law. Read more at www.mediamashup.org

*****************************************
A note from DaTechGugy:
I hope you enjoyed Christopher Harper’s piece. Remember we will be judging the entries in Da Magnificent tryouts by hits both to their post and to DaTipJar. So if you like Christopher Harper’s work, please consider sharing this post, and if you hit DaTipjar [on the right] because of it, don’t forget to mention Chris’ post is the reason you did so. In case you missed his other pieces, here they are:

Budding reporters and politics
Give terrorists what they deserve: anonymity
The ‘BS’ factor
A Godless Olympics




Olimometer 2.52

Please consider Subscribing. If less than 1/3 of 1% of our readers subscribed at $10 a month we’d have the 114.5 subscribers needed to our annual goal all year without solicitation.

Plus of course all subscribers get my weekly podcast emailed directly to you before it goes up anywhere else.


Choose a Subscription level



I was at Lucianne.com looking for ideas for a post when I noticed these two pieces within five posts of each other that were interesting. One pushing a Reuters story from the 19th:

trump 1

The other posting a mediate story saying the exact opposite:

trump 2

I thought they would make an interesting contrast so I tried to pull up both stories, the Mediaite story dated today came up easy.

However when I tried to click on the Reuters link I kept getting “page not found”.

I tried a search for the title and found multiple results such as this one at Forbes:

Trump Visits Baton Rouge, Despite Governor’s Request Not To

We welcome him to Louisiana…but not for a photo-op,’ the Democratic governor said.


U.S. Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump and his running mate toured the flood-damaged city of Baton Rouge on Friday, despite the Democratic Louisiana governor’s urging not to make political stops in areas affected by recent deadly rains.

Trump’s motorcade drove past piles of possessions and building materials that had been ripped out of flooded homes en route to Greenwell Springs Baptist Church in a flood-ravaged portion of East Baton Rouge Parish.

“You’re all going to be fine, you’re going to be fine,” Trump told several dozen supporters gathered outside, many asking for autographs and selfies.

But for the life of me I couldn’t find the story at Reuters.  So I went to the Reuters site and looked for the story.  There was no sign of it, but I DID find this story, with a time stamp a few hours later with this title:

Trump tours flooded Louisiana, Obama to visit next week

And when I looked at the body of the story it seemed awfully…familiar (emphasis mine)

U.S. Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump toured flood-battered Louisiana on Friday, shrugging off the Democratic state governor’s plea for politicians not to stop in areas affected by deadly rains.

President Barack Obama said he was also eager for a firsthand look at the damage done by floods that damaged more than 40,000 homes and killed at least 13 people, announcing plans to visit Baton Rouge on Tuesday.

Obama’s travel requires a massive retinue of Secret Service agents and assistance from local and state law enforcement officials, so the White House usually waits to visit disaster zones to avoid tying up police and emergency resources needed elsewhere.

On Friday, Trump’s motorcade drove past piles of possessions and building materials that had been ripped out of flooded homes en route to Greenwell Springs Baptist Church in a hard-hit portion of East Baton Rouge Parish.

“You’re going to be fine,” Trump told several dozen supporters gathered outside, many asking for autographs and selfies.

LA governor John Bel Edwards found his original statement had not gone over well and decided to revise it, apparently Reuters found that their old story noting the president would not be visiting for a while wasn’t playing well either so they decided to :

Delete the original story

Rewrite the headline to emphasize that president Obama was visiting Louisiana

Insert new copy into the old story suggesting president was ALWAYS going to visit while making an excuse for his failure to do so before the Trump visit.

Or put simply, the attempt to advance the narrative of Trump as an opportunist for visiting Louisiana  and Obama as responsible by not visiting had not only failed but proved inconvenient.  So Reuters decided, rather than write a new story to show the president’s change of heart and showing him forced to visit in reaction to Donald Trump’s move, decided to rewrite history to push the narrative of the president planning to visit this week all along.

There are many words to describe this, I choose “dishonest” and “dishonorable”.

As  Michael Goodwin quoted by Ed Driscoll at Instapundit put it American journalism is collapsing before our eyes,

Personally I disagree, I suspect American journalism was always like this, it’s just that thanks to the net it’s not possible to hide these trick anymore.

Unexpectedly.


Today starts the last two weeks of our 6 week tryouts for Da Magnificent Prospects You can check out their work Monday evening, Tuesday at Noon, All Day Thursday and Saturday at noon. If you like what you see from them consider hitting DaTipjar in support of them (and please mention their name when you do) as both internet hits and tipjar hits will be part of scoring who stays & who goes.

(If you can’t see DaTipJar button below on their posts use the one on the 2nd column on the right)




Olimometer 2.52

Please consider Subscribing. If less than 1/3 of 1% of our readers subscribed at $10 a month we’d have the 114.5 subscribers needed to our annual goal all year without solicitation.

Plus of course all subscribers get my weekly podcast emailed directly to you before it goes up anywhere else.


Choose a Subscription level



christrio

Even with the iconic statue of Jesus Christ watching over the Rio Olympics, NBC and mainstream media outlets have chosen to ignore the importance of religion among athletes.

For example, swimmer Michael Phelps, one of the greatest Olympians ever, lost his way until he found God a few years ago.

“I was a train wreck. I was like a time bomb, waiting to go off. I had no self-esteem, no self-worth. There were times where I didn’t want to be here. It was not good. I felt lost,” Phelps said.

After his second DUI, Phelps got a call from former NFL star Ray Lewis, who helped the swimmer onto the road of religious recovery.

Simone Biles, the gymnast who won four gold medals, carries a rosary in her warmup bag and lights a candle in church before an event. Instead of emphasizing her religious beliefs, NBC and others talk about her mother, a former drug addict.

Katie Ledecky, a Catholic like Biles, says a Hail Mary before each swimming event and proudly makes her religious views known. Simone Manuel, the first African-American woman to earn a gold medal in swimming, praised God after winning the 100-meter freestyle. Her reference to God got edited out when NBC put up the video on YouTube.

After Usain Bolt of Jamaica, the fastest man in the world, won his third gold medal in the 100-meter sprint, he fell to his knees to pray. The NBC commentators apparently couldn’t bring themselves to utter the word “prayer.”

Many other examples exist, but NBC and other mainstream media have focused on less significant details of athletes’ lives rather than their trust in God. Fortunately, faith-based news organizations have chronicled what the athletes themselves consider their most important characteristic: their belief in God.

The Christian Post wrote about U.S. athletes and their faith at http://www.christianpost.com/news/10-christian-team-usa-athletes-at-rio-olympics-2016-who-put-god-first-167556/

Eric Metaxas interviewed religion writer Terry Mattingly about God and the Olympics at https://soundcloud.com/the-eric-metaxas-show/terry-mattingly-5


Christopher Harper, a longtime journalist with The Associated Press, Newsweek, ABC News and The Washington Times, teaches media law. Read more at www.mediamashup.org

*****************************************
A note from DaTechGugy:
I hope you enjoyed Christopher Harper’s piece. Remember we will be judging the entries in Da Magnificent tryouts by hits both to their post and to DaTipJar. So if you like Christopher Harper’s work, please consider sharing this post, and if you hit DaTipjar [on the right] because of it, don’t forget to mention Chris’ post is the reason you did so. In case you missed his other pieces, here they are:

Budding reporters and politics
Give terrorists what they deserve: anonymity
The ‘BS’ factor

Olimometer 2.52

Please consider subscribing. If less than 1/3 of 1% of our readers subscribed at $10 a month, we’d have the 114.5 subscribers needed to our annual goal all year without solicitation.

Plus, of course, all subscribers get my weekly podcast emailed directly to you before it goes up anywhere else.

Choose a Subscription level
Beanie : $2.00 USD – weekly
Cap : $10.00 USD – monthly
Hat : $20.00 USD – monthly
Fedora : $25.00 USD – monthly
Grand Fedora : $100.00 USD – monthly

During the 4 pm hour on Sunday while as I scrambled to upload the last of my videos from Denver I turned on CNN in time to see Wisconsin State Senator Democrat Lena Taylor dismiss the looting and violence in Milwaukee saying “I don’t care about the buildings” She went on talking about the pain and hopelessness of those who committed the looting and rioting, talking about their lack of employment among other things.

Before we lament the fact that seeing an elected official running for re-election defend riots and violence is no longer a shock in America and forgetting for a moment that in living memory we had this thing called the “Great Depression” where unemployment pain and hopelessness abounded nationwide, yet still didn’t lead to the riots, looting and burning that have now become practically a norm for Democrat dominated cities in the Obama years, let’s play a thought game.

Even though the last time a republican was mayor of Milwaukee construction of the RMS Titanic had not yet started and the Cubs were world series champions let’s pretend, just for a moment, that State Senator Lena Taylor was not a black Democrat but a Republican of any color or race and ask: “How would the media react to those statements?”

Here’s what I think:

If Senator Lena Taylor was a republican then her statements defending the rioters would be the lead on every single networks. We would see panels of “experts” speak with astonishment deploring such a sentiment.

We would see newspapers print headlines in bold type and huge fonts screaming GOP defends rioters, and editorial pages from Boston to LA would talk about how the low the party has gone.

On panel shows we would see Paul Begala, Chris Cuomo, Donna Brazile David Axelrod talk about how Donald Trump needs to disavow Senator Lena Taylor. We would see Chuck Todd and George Stephanopoulos and John Dickerson challenge Donald Trump and his surrogates to do so repeatedly and press them repeatedly until those words came.

Furthermore it would not stop with Trump, we would see Harry Reid, Claire McCaskill and Nancy Pelosi demand that every Republican running for the US Senate or the House denounce Senator Taylor, reporters from CNN, NBC, MSNBC, ABC, the New York Times, the Boston Globe, the LA Times and the Washington Post would hound candidates from Kelly Ayotte to Marco Rubio to denounce the remarks of State Senator Taylor and until and unless they did promptly they would run story after story about their fecklessness in the face of a pol defending riots and lawlessness.

And when the presidential debates rolled along Hillary Clinton would challenge Donald Trump to once again denounce Senator Taylor on the stage and the unbiased moderators from the media would join in that demand, and no matter what his answer or actions the story on every major network would be how Donald Trump addressed GOP support for rioters and looters.

That would be the case if State Senator Lena Taylor was a republican and said what she said on CNN sunday afternoon.

But Lena Taylor is not a republican, so none of the networks will find her statements worthy of the front page. No new broadcast will lead with her words. If the subject of her words even came up in newspapers or on cable news panels of “experts” would decry the hopelessness of the black community and cite slavery (even though Wisconsin was admitted to the union in 1848 as a “free state”) and discrimination as the underlying causes of the riots.

No member of the media will link Senator Taylor’s remarks to Hillary Clinton, Begala, Cuomo, Brazile and Axelrod will not demand that Hillary Clinton disavow them and if a Trump surrogate or Trump himself demands it Chuck Todd and George Stephanopoulos will dismiss it as a ploy to divert attention from the polls..

If Paul Ryan or Mitch McConnell or Reince Priebus demand that every Democrat running for the US Senate or House candidate denounce Senator Taylor’s remarks, it will be at best dismissed as not having anything to do with elections in NH or Florida or Colorado or at worst be denounced instead as an attempt by the GOP to spread racial division.

And when the presidential debates roll along if Donald Trump brings up these remarks challenging Hillary Clinton to denounce them Hillary Clinton will play the race card and the moderators will scold Donald Trump for being divisive and the story on every major network will be about Donald Trump playing the “Willie Horton” card.

And that my friends is the difference between an unbiased media and one that consists of Democrats with bylines.

Closing Thought. If I was running the Donald Trump campaign I would have Mr. Trump mention Senator Taylor’s remarks in every speech in every state he’s in. I’d demand democrats across the board denounce them and ask loudly why the MSM is not doing so. And if challenged I would ask the same question that this post is titled: Imagine If Wisconsin State Senator Lena Taylor was a Republican. I’d make every Democrat and member of the media defend Senator Taylor’s remarks so every voter watching could see them do so.

But that’s me.


Back from Denver and over the next 30 days the bills will be coming in. While the Franklin Center covered most of the Trip there were incidentals that add up. So if you like what we do here and would like to help it continue please consider hitting DaTipJar below




Olimometer 2.52

Please consider Subscribing. Right now our subscribers consist of 1/50 of 1% of our total unique visitors based on last years numbers.

If we can get another 150 subscribers at $10 a month (another 1/10 of 1% of those who have visited this year) We can meet our annual goals with no trouble, with the same number of subscribers at $20 a month I could afford to cover the presidential campaign outside of New England firsthand.

And of course at that price you get the Da Magnificent Seven plus those we hope to add on and all subscribers get my weekly podcast emailed directly to you before it goes up anywhere else.


Choose a Subscription level



John "Lee' Ruberry
John “Lee” Ruberry of the Magnificent Seven

By John Ruberry

I try not to cover the same subject in successive weeks in my weekly posts here, but these are not ordinary times. Media bias in regards to the presidential campaign is my topic, as it was last Sunday.

Fox News’ Howard Kurtz brought my attention to a New York Times article by Jim Rutenberg, a media columnist, who views a Donald Trump presidency as “potentially dangerous” and he essentially encourages reporters to “move closer than you’ve ever been to being oppositional.”

In other words, it’s okay for liberal journalists–an oxymoron–to work against the Republican nominee and support Hilary Clinton.

An oxymoron? A 2014 Indiana University poll found that just seven percent of journalists identify as Republican. My guess is that once you remove Fox News and Wall Street Journal reporters from the sample then that percentage would be quite close to zero percent.

Yes, Donald Trump and other Republicans are right. The media is biased. Yet, many voters, perhaps most, don’t understand, possibly because teachers and professors, themselves mostly comprised of leftists, tell students that journalists are simply collectors and conveyors of facts.

But the liberal guardians control that conveyor. Last week the Taliban-loving father of the Orlando terrorist who murdered 49 gay night club patrons sat directly behind Hillary Clinton as she spoke in that Florida city. Did the mainstream media cover that? Kinda sorta. But when white supremacist David Duke endorsed Trump’s candidacy in February, that incident received six times the coverage that the assassin’s dad story.

Last week’s Time cover showed a cartoonish image of Trump and his famous blonde hair pile with drips, with this headline, “Meltdown.” Sure, Trump–disclosure time, I voted for him in the Illinois Republican Primary and I will vote for in November–has engaged in many self-inflicted wounds.

But where is the Time cover story with Hillary Clinton with a Pinocchio nose? The Democratic nominee has repeatedly lied–wait, make that purposefully lied–about turning over emails from her private email server while serving as Obama’s secretary of state, about sending and receiving classified emails over that server, about Benghazi, and about ties to the so-called Clinton Foundation charity and the US State Department.

Donald Trump is right. The system is rigged. Clinton deserves to be under indictment. She isn’t because the Obama Justice Department is protecting her. And the corrupt media is shielding her by distracting the populace and preventing widespread rightful indignation.

The presidential race is being subverted by a media coup d’état.

Oh, if you are one of the increasingly fewer people who still subscribes to Time and the New York Times–and you are a conservative, I suggest that you kill the beast. Unsubscribe.

John Ruberry regularly blogs at Marathon Pundit.

 

This just in from The New York Times: Journalists are having trouble being objective about Donald Trump.

Seriously?

Here’s what the red, old lady had to say recently:

“If you view a Trump presidency as something that’s potentially dangerous, then your reporting is going to reflect that. You would move closer than you’ve ever been to being oppositional. That’s uncomfortable and uncharted territory for every mainstream, non-opinion journalist I’ve ever known, and by normal standards, untenable.”

The author, media columnist Jim Rutenberg, apparently isn’t much of a reporter or has ignored significant evidence of media bias when he served as the lead reporter on the 2012 campaign and a White House correspondent.

Note: I am not an ardent supporter of Trump. Also, I realize that the readers of DaTechGuy are not surprised by The New York Times’s arrogance and ignorance. But it is noteworthy that Rutenberg actually puts his analysis in writing at http://ow.ly/IOQg3034Bsk

NewYorkerNoted plagiarist Fareed Zakaria made no bones about his attitude about Trump. He simply called the GOP presidential candidate a “bull****” artist on CNN and in The Washington Post.

In the neck-snapping underpinning for his “astute” analysis, Zakaria quoted a Princeton University professor who actually wrote an academic paper entitled, “On Bull****.”

In case you need a definition, a BS-er, “is neither on the side of the true nor on the side of the false. His eye is not on the facts at all . . . except insofar as they may be pertinent to his interest in getting away with what he says.”

It seems to me that the definition applies to Zakaria and many of his fellow travelers in the media.

Christopher Harper, a longtime journalist with The Associated Press, Newsweek, ABC News and The Washington Times, teaches media law. Read more at www.mediamashup.org


A note from DaTechGugy: I hope you enjoyed Christopher Harper’s piece. Remember we will be judging the entries in Da Magnificent tryouts by hits both to their post and to DaTipJar. So if you like Christopher Harper’s work, please consider sharing this post, and if you hit DaTipjar because of it, don’t forget to mention Chris’ post is the reason you did so. In case you missed it, his first piece was Budding reporters and politics. His second was Give terrorists what they deserve: anonymity.

Olimometer 2.52

Please consider Subscribing. If less than 1/3 of 1% of our readers subscribed at $10 a month, we’d have the 114.5 subscribers needed to our annual goal all year without solicitation.

Plus, of course, all subscribers get my weekly podcast emailed directly to you before it goes up anywhere else.

Choose a Subscription level
Beanie : $2.00 USD – weekly
Cap : $10.00 USD – monthly
Hat : $20.00 USD – monthly
Fedora : $25.00 USD – monthly
Grand Fedora : $100.00 USD – monthly

You’ve heard about the media in general and twitter in particularly giveing Hillary Clinton “media privilege” well I think this visual of this tweet says it all

twitter clinton guard

I spotted this on instapundit and noticed the warning about sensitive material. Such a label of course automatically implies that what is beyond it is so terrible, so horrible, so beyond the pale that one risks crossing the bounds of propriety if one see it and it goes without saying such an image shouldn’t be shown to kids.

But we are an adult blog here so brace yourselves here is the actual image that is SO sensitive that twitter wanted it censored click MORE if you dare….

Continue reading “How Twitter Uses “Media Privilege” to Play Palace Guard for Hillary in One Image”

By John Ruberry

I overheard someone saying yesterday, “Did you you hear that Donald Trump hates babies? Yes, a baby was crying at one of his rallies and Trump said, ‘Get that baby out of here.'”

This person is a member of America’s largest voting bloc, the uninformed voter. He gets his news from his Facebook feed–FB’s trending topic page was recently exposed as biased against conservatives–and I suspect he doesn’t know who is state representative is or his member of Congress is. But presidential elections bring out uninformed voters at a higher rate than in off-year elections, which explains Barack Obama and the Democratic Party’s wins in 2008 and 2012 and the Republican successes in 2010 and 2014.

Oh, about that baby. While there was some harmless banter between Trump and the baby’s mother, the media lied, particularly its headline writers. Low-information voters read headlines but are less willing to read articles because sometimes they contain ideas and words they may not understand. Or maybe the uninformed are lazy, which of course explains how they got that way.

Here’s an honest headline: Donald Trump did not tell the baby’s mother to leave his rally.

Who says so? The infant’s mom, that’s who.

The media created a firestorm over Trump’s feuding with Khizr Khan, the father of a US Army officer whose son was killed in a terror attack in Iraq. While the political newcomer would have been better off avoiding the dispute altogether, the dishonest mainstream media avoided mentioning Khan’s suspected ties to the extremist Muslim Brotherhood and his history of supporting sharia law.

John "Lee' Ruberry
John “Lee” Ruberry

Of more importance to the ordinary American is that Hillary Clinton flat-out lied to Fox News’ Chris Wallace about her email scandal last week. Specifically she lied about her lying–FBI director James Comey did not say Clinton was truthful about her explanations of her use of an unsecured email server while she served as Barack Obama’s secretary of state.

In an attempt to talk her way out of her self-inflicted mess, on Friday Clinton, in her first press conference of 2016, uttered a top-level gaffe, claiming that she “may have short-circuited” during the Wallace interview.

Is America ready for a president who short-circuits? Or one who is a serial liar?

John Ruberry regularly blogs at Marathon Pundit.

The Sage: [Recurring phrase]…as any fool can plainly see.

Groo: I can plainly see that

Groo the Wanderer

One of the reasons why the email scandal has so hurt Hillary Clinton (and why our friends in the MSM are still pushing back against it) is that it’s a scandal that people could understand.  You don’t delete something and keep it away from investigators unless you are hiding something (just as folks don’t plead the 5th if the disclosures are harmless).

Well guess who is deleting things now:

Khizr Khan, the Muslim Gold Star father that Democrats and their allies media wide have been using to hammer GOP presidential nominee Donald J. Trump, has deleted his law firm’s website from the Internet.

Now that is an interesting move, I wonder why he would feel compelled to do this:

This development is significant, as his website proved—as Breitbart News and others have reported—that he financially benefits from unfettered pay-to-play Muslim migration into America.

What you mean Muslim immigration?  Isn’t that one of the two issues that Trump has highlighted with success that has also been a huge issue in Europe, particularly Germany lately 

Angela Merkel‘s open door policy to refugees is no longer welcomed in Germany following four savage Muslim attacks in a week.

Attitudes to Syrians seeking asylum has hardened after ISIS suicide bomber Mohammad Daleel blew himself up outside a wine bar in the quiet in the quiet Barvarian market town of Ansbach.

Other violence over the space of four days in the last week has left Germans feeling vulnerable and afraid. A new survey found that 83 per cent of Germans see immigration as their nation’s biggest challenge – twice as many as a year ago.

I wonder what might have been sitting at Mr. Kahn’s web site on Immigration?

A snapshot of his now deleted website, as captured by the Wayback Machine which takes snapshots archiving various websites on the Internet, shows that as a lawyer he engages in procurement of EB5 immigration visas and other “Related Immigration Services.”

For the last week Khan has been useful for the media as everyone can understand the grief of a parent who has lost a son in service.

But people can also understand people delete web sites for a reason.  Kahn has apparently decided that the damage of his web deleting his web site is less than leaving it up, and this combined with the benghazi families whose sons deaths are tied to Hillary means trouble for the  Khan narrative.

Alas that scrutiny is the price for the MSM giving Mr. Khizr (I really don’t want publicity, honest I don’t) Khan the 40-50 minutes for his outrage over Donald Trump words for every one minute given to over parents of people killed by Hillary Clinton’s actions and inactions, eventually people start looking closer at Mr Khan who apparently, unlike Pat Smith, can’t stand the scrutiny.

Unexpectedly


Don’t forget this is the 2nd week of our 6 week tryouts for Da Magnificent Prospect, You can check out their work Monday evening, Tuesday at Noon, All Day Thursday and Saturday at noon. If you like what you see from them consider hitting DaTipjar in support of them (and please mention their name when you do) as both internet hits and tipjar hits will be part of scoring who stays & who goes.




Olimometer 2.52

Please consider Subscribing. If less than 1/3 of 1% of our readers subscribed at $10 a month we’d have the 114.5 subscribers needed to our annual goal all year without solicitation.

Plus of course all subscribers get my weekly podcast emailed directly to you before it goes up anywhere else.


Choose a Subscription level



The last few years have proven that the left can convince a low information voter of a lot of things, but even the full power of the mainstream media and the strongest zealots from the War on Women® brigade would not be able to convince the American public that Bill Clinton would have no interest or business on a private island where orgies took place.

DaTechGuy:  Private Islands, Orgies, Bill Clinton? Nothing to see here 4/14/2014

Let me begin this post by saying that I think by running nude pictures of Donald Trump wife and the possible next first lady the NY Post has managed to achieve a new low in journalism which given the state of journalism in the United States these days is quite an accomplishment.

But having said that the NY Post has also inadvertently thrown a gauntlet down to every late night comic on TV.

What gauntlet? The obvious Bill Clinton Melania Trump skit test.

It is completely impossible to look at the NY Post’s photos of the possible future first lady and not imagine Bill Clinton’s reaction to it and start laughing.

Furthermore is it almost impossible to not picture a skit whereby Bill Clinton is ogling the NY Post Melania Trump cover and Hillary walks in.

The possibilities, from Bill Trying to hide the newspaper, to Hillary getting jealous (to Monica getting jealous), to Bill deciding to submit an absentee ballot for Trump over it, are practically endless.

For a comic writer it’s a fatter pitch than Denny McLain’s final toss to Mickey Mantle in Sept 1968.  Such a skit practically writes itself.  It’s a total no brainer.

At least it would be if this wasn’t true:

Johnny Carson delivered, and he did so without revealing his party affiliation.

That was then. Now, we have late night comics choosing sides. Some, like Trevor Noah, Larry Wilmore and Seth Meyers, are essentially signing up for Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign.

We’ve already seen Stephen Colbert perform damage control for the DNC leaks. You’d be hard pressed to think how a DNC operative would handle the crisis better.

And that’s the problem here, while the Bill Clinton jokes write themselves the last thing Hillary Clinton needs is something to remind the world, particularly women under the age of forty who might not remember Paula Jones, Monica Lewinsky or Juanita Broaddrick of her husband’s ahem interesting extracurricular activities.

That’s why this  move by the post, while in itself horrible, is extremely revealing in a completely unintended way.

If the late night comics do the skits and the jokes concerning Bill Clinton and the Melania issue then we know that no matter what their political opinions, they still understand their primary job as a comic is to make people laugh.

If the late night comics avoid any joke concerning Bill Clinton & Melania Trump, and leave the skits and videos for the likes of Steven Crowder,  then they are declaring for all the world to see that for the next hundred days their only purpose is to elect Hillary Clinton.

By Tuesday morning will know which it’s going to be.

Closing thought #1.  A really edgy comic would do the skit with Hillary doing the oogling and Bill Catching her or Hillary catching Bill, scolding him then when he leaves the room embarrassed ogling the issue herself.  That is about as likely to happen on late night as God deciding to have the hair on my head spontaneously grow back.

Closing thought #2  If the Comic do NOT touch this (as I suspect they won’t) If I was Donald Trump I’d make the joke myself, saying  he can picture Bill or even Hillary ogling the photos and when the MSM gets outraged (particularly on the Hillary thing) have him ask bluntly if they think there is anything wrong if Hillary preferred women?


I’d like to think we do good work here If you’d like to help us keep up the pace please consider hitting DaTipJar.

And don’t forget this is the 2nd week of our 6 week tryouts for Da Magnificent Prospect, You can check out their work Monday evening, Tuesday at Noon, All Day Thursday and Saturday at noon. If you like what you see from them consider hitting DaTipjar in support of them (and please mention their name when you do) as both internet hits and tipjar hits will be part of scoring who stays & who goes.




Olimometer 2.52

Please consider Subscribing. If less than 1/3 of 1% of our readers subscribed at $10 a month we’d have the 114.5 subscribers needed to our annual goal all year without solicitation.

Plus of course all subscribers get my weekly podcast emailed directly to you before it goes up anywhere else.


Choose a Subscription level



There was a throw away line in this piece at Instapundit concerning Debbie Wasserman Schultz’s and wikileaks that jumped out at me:

What is it with the DNC and their strange stalker-like obsession with Morning Joe anyhow? Here’s video of the Obama administration emailing the show and one of Joe’s distaff co-hosts (possibly Savannah Guthrie) reading on the air a White House “correction” to their coverage back in October of 2009. That was also around the time “a ‘senior White House official’sent an email calling Joe Scarborough an ‘asshole’ for mocking Pres. Obama’s Nobel Peace Prize.”

And you thought Trump couldn’t handle criticism!

While these days my work/prayer schedule prevents me from watching the answer is actually pretty obvious to anyone who has watched the show.

Morning Joe has two things that no other MSNBC show has

 A Republican host who while occasionally going off the reservation and not a big fan of Tea Party types provides a reliable conservative viewpoint on basic issues that as a rule MSNBC viewers are never exposed to. 

A Democrat co-host who while a partisan Democrat is honest and cares about her reputation enough not to lie to the viewers simply for the sake of the party and is willing to question things that smell to her.

Even worse when a Tea Party conservative shows up on the show, they are treated fairly and not as a rule dismissed as some kind of loony

It’s one thing to dismiss Fox or GOP activists or even bloggers it’s another to dismiss something when the MSNBC drivetime show talks about something as legit.

For the Democrats that makes them dangerous.

That’s why I think conservatives should invest time in the show an cultivate both Joe and Mika, it’s their easiest entre to introduce news that the MSM wants to suppresses into the stream outside of Fox.


I’d like to think we do good work here If you’d like to help us keep up the pace please consider hitting DaTipJar




Olimometer 2.52

Please consider Subscribing. If less than 1/3 of 1% of our readers subscribed at $10 a month we’d have the 114.5 subscribers needed to our annual goal all year without solicitation.

Plus of course all subscribers get my weekly podcast emailed directly to you before it goes up anywhere else.


Choose a Subscription level



Young journalists covering the Democrat convention listened to a point of view they are unlikely to hear this week in Philadelphia—a conservative one.

As a journalism professor at Temple University, I was invited to speak to a group of 25 students at the School District of Philadelphia, spending about two hours answering questions and talking about the upcoming presidential race.

We calmly discussed many issues, including race relations, immigration and Donald Trump.

You realize that almost no one agreed with you, one student told me later, adding that a teacher did describe the meeting as a turning point in the students’ journalistic training. Of course, I replied, that’s because you’ve almost never heard a conservative point of view.

Harper meets with Philadelphia students reporting on the convention.
Philadelphia students meet a conservative.

These students are among the best and the brightest from Philadelphia’s troubled schools. But their beliefs seem mired in years of leftist education and peer pressure.

One student stated matter-of-factly that Trayvon Martin was murdered. He was killed, I responded, and a jury found George Zimmerman innocent of murder. Accuracy is critical in journalism, I added.

One asked this question: Why can’t everyone come to the United States like we can go to other countries? We can visit, but we can’t live in China, Europe or much of the world, I replied, because Americans, like U.S. immigrants, need residence visas.

Another posed this question: Isn’t it possible Donald Trump would declare martial law? If he did, many conservatives would exercise their rights under the Second Amendment, I said.

I’m not sure I convinced many of them to come around to a conservative viewpoint, but one of the newly minted reporters asked me for an interview after the session. One step at a time, I thought.

Longtime journalist Christopher Harper teaches media law.
Longtime journalist Christopher Harper teaches media law and writes at www.mediamashup.org

A note from DaTechGugy: I hope you enjoyed Christopher Harper’s piece. Remember we will be judging the entries in Da Magnificent tryouts by hits both to their post and to DaTipJar. So if you like Christopher Harper’s work, please consider sharing this post, and if you hit DaTipjar because of it, don’t forget to mention Chris’ post is the reason you did so.




Olimometer 2.52

Please consider Subscribing. If less than 1/3 of 1% of our readers subscribed at $10 a month we’d have the 114.5 subscribers needed to our annual goal all year without solicitation.

Plus of course all subscribers get my weekly podcast emailed directly to you before it goes up anywhere else.


Choose a Subscription level



Trump lawn signBy John Ruberry

The mainstream media, which of course is no fan of the Republican Party and its nominee Donald Trump, in what must have been an act of collusion, almost immediately dismissed what I thought was an A- acceptance address as a “dark speech.”

Oh, why just an A- from me? I thought Trump’s speech as a bit long, and that he should have used the safety part of the speech at 11:00PM Eastern/10:00PM Central when non-politicized viewers, many of whom only vote in presidential year elections, would be tuning in searching for the local evening news.

Trump did something in last week’s speech that the MSM, and many Republicans, including this one, have been calling on the GOP to do for decades: make an appeal to urban voters.

Democrats run nearly all of America’s largest cities. Some, such as Detroit and Chicago, haven’t had Republican mayors in the lifetimes of most of the people reading this post. However, the turnaround of one city, New York, was achieved only because of the doggedness of one determined man, Republican Rudy Giuliani, who was the mayor of America’s largest city from 1994-2001. NYC was viewed as ungovernable prior to the arrival of the “Mayor of America” at Gracie Mansion.

Burned out Detroit
Southwest Detroit

Maybe only New Yorkers understand. Manhattanite Trump does.

From his acceptance speech:

This administration has failed America’s inner cities. It’s failed them on education. It’s failed them on jobs. It’s failed them on crime. It’s failed them at every level.

When I am president, I will work to ensure that all of our kids are treated equally, and protected equally.

Every action I take, I will ask myself: does this make life better for young Americans in Baltimore, Chicago, Detroit, Ferguson who have as much of a right to live out their dreams as any other child America?

Brilliant stuff.

Rand Paul, who like his father is generally the Republican that leftist media know-it-alls hate the least, received wide-spread praise for making a campaign stop on Chicago’s South Side last year. But such plaudits were easy because Paul was not the Republican nominee and Trump is. It’s circle-the-wagons time for the dishonest media, because the general election is now only a few months away.

Burned-out three story frame
Chicago’s South Side

Despite Trump’s reach-out to urban voters, he will not win a majority of the black vote. He won’t receive even fifteen percent of it. Trump will not win Illinois or Maryland’s electoral votes. But Trump spoke like a leader, not a candidate, as he accepted the Republican nomination for president.

The GOP political newcomer may be able to peel off enough black votes to become the first Republican presidential candidate to win Michigan since 1988.

I believe, maybe it’s just a hope of mine, that a majority of Americans are looking for a leader, not a partisan hack to steer us through troubled times.

As for the cities, we’ve tried it the Democratic Party way for over fifty years. Detroit is an urban ruin. Chicago and Baltimore are headed that way.

Trump wants to heal the rot.

And Trump, yes, really wants to Make America Great Again. All of it.

John Ruberry regularly blogs at Marathon Pundit. He regularly ventures into inner-city Chicago for blogging material and has traveled to Detroit.

If you read my morning post you know that in my opinion Ted Cruz’s speech at the Republican Convention was the only honorable response for him in this situation and I applaud him for it.

However you might noticed that while I think Ted Cruz was totally justified in what he said at and after the speech as you can see by the title of this post I think Donald Trump played Ted Cruz and won, and I would even say won brilliantly.

The reason is apparent when you ask a very basic question:

What advantage does Donald Trump get with a Ted Cruz endorsement?

The answer is almost none.

Donald Trump spent the entire campaign (falsely) referring to Ted Cruz as “lying Ted”, the media, which hates Ted Cruz MUCH more than they do Trump and have been attacking him since the day he was elected, played it up a year.  He would get no love from the GOP establishment which hates Ted Cruz as much as the media does from an endorsement and the number of NeverTrump people from the GOP who would vote for Trump after a Cruz endorsement is so minimal that it’s not worth thinking of.

In fact a Ted Cruz endorsement might even HURT Trump who is still trying to win over Bernie Sanders fans who believe Ted Cruz is the devil and seriously could you imagine the gift to Hillary Clinton a Ted Cruz endorsement would be?  I can see the ad now:

Mythical Cruz Endorsement speech:  “Donald Trump is a great leader”

Cut to old Donald Trump “We call him lying Ted”

Mythical Cruz Endorsement speech “Donald trump will make America Great again”

Cut to old Donald Trump speech: “He lies lies and lies”

I’m Hillary Clinton & I approve this message

Donald Trump knows media and knows visuals, he isn’t dumb enough to let this happen.

There is also no advantage for NOT having Ted Cruz speak.  He won 11 states and made a strong case if he was denied a speaking spot or stayed away it would draw into question the “Big Tent” business and “party unity” meme that Trump was playing on.  There is no visual no media no nothing.  Nothing at all, no advantage.

Instead consider what we saw at the GOP convention last night.

Images of the delegates on the GOP floor booing Cruz in support of Trump

A contrast between Cruz’s attack and the pro-trump speech from Mike Pence (who endorsed Cruz before the Indiana primary) causing Cruz grief from all over.

A contrast between Cruz’s “attack” and people reporting Trump thought Cruz’s non-endorsement was “No Big deal

(Even as I type this Rudy Giuliani was on MSNBC calling Trump the “bigger man”.)

And reporter after reporter talking down Ted Cruz both that night and even the next day

And remember all of this is taking place with a GOP convention that is drawing millions more viewers than usual and sets up tonight as an even bigger potential TV audience.

And doesn’t even take into account all the social media radio etc this generated or the fact that it took MSM attempt to go wild Meliana “plagiarism” business off the tube.

All this was made possible because Trump is good at reading people.  He understands who Ted Cruz is and knew that despite all that “lying Ted” BS that Cruz is an honorable man and used that to his advantage.

Trump also knows media, he knows the audience and played to them manipulating the situation, the visuals and the media because he understands that the audience for any counter argument will be only a tiny percentage of this and consists mostly of political geeks like you and me dear reader.  If Mitt Romney had 1/10 of the Trump media savvy he’d be president today.  It was absolutely brilliant.

And remember each of these conflicts at the convention that the MSM thinks are so damaging helped build audience to draw people who would normally never watch this stuff and give Trump free access to make his case.

And now that Bernie has dropped out what drama is there in the Democrat convention?  What person who has not already made up their mind will be watching it?

Nobody.

Trump won the case and the night and will likely win the competing conventions even with the MSM doing all they can to knock him off and prop up Hillary.  Furthermore his actions maximize the potential vote increase from persuadable voters while keeping any damage localized to voters he had already likely lost.

You can debate Trump and his morality all day and all of the night but in my opinion this is pure LBJ class political genius.

And I submit and suggest that’s not debatable .

One final thing, the fact that Ted Cruz did the right thing and deserves praise rather than blowback he is getting is totally irrelevant to this analysis, but it all comes down to what matters most as this tweet says:


I’d like to think we do good work here If you’d like to help us keep up the pace please consider hitting DaTipJar




Olimometer 2.52

Please consider Subscribing. If less than 1/3 of 1% of our readers subscribed at $10 a month we’d have the 114.5 subscribers needed to our annual goal all year without solicitation.

Plus of course all subscribers get my weekly podcast emailed directly to you before it goes up anywhere else.


Choose a Subscription level



There was a lot of talk this morning on the left side of the MSM about plagiarism concerning Melania Trump and her speech yesterday.

Now I only heard a little bit of her speech before I went on my shift and have not had a chance to hear the rest so I have no idea if and how much of her speech echoed Michelle Obama circa 08, but if you want to understand why the MSM wanted the subject of today to be her, there are two words to explain it:

Pat Smith.

Now if are a person who gets their news from the MSM you likely never heard of Pat Smith the mother of Sean Smith who died at Benghazi until yesterday when she spoke at the GOP convention saying this

You might wonder, if your primary news source is the MSM why she is only saying this now but the fact is she has been doing so for four years but during that time the MSM have treated Pat Smith Unlike Cindy Sheehan who was made a celebrity to harm George W Bush, as an unperson and unless you watch Fox News you have not likely seen or heard a word Mrs. Smith has said on Benghazi since it happened. In fact the only MSM journalist who gave her the tie of day was as you might guess has a name that “Lake Mapper”.

Her speech directly contradicts the MSM narrative and carries credibility to the audience that the Trump convention has drawn because she is not a pol. It was so devastating that Chris Matthews managed to go over the top even for him claiming she “Ruined the evening”, which if you are Hillary Clinton fan trying to change the subject from her mendacity, and a GQ reporter declared on twitter: I don’t care how many children Pat Smith lost I would like to beat her to death and spent last night defending said tweet until it was finally deleted and apology issued today claiming “satire

but for my money the most telling moment came when CNN switched to Wolf Blitzer after her speech who attempted to spin it, unfortunately for Mr. Blitzer he was pared with Jake Tapper who being Jake Tapper didn’t play along even to the point where he stated one couldn’t dispute some of her points.

As I tweeted at the time You never saw an anchor so desperate to switch to a panel in your life.

it’s rather telling that Politifact tried their best to dispute her statement while at the same time being smart enough to refuse to call a Benghazi mother a liar and that when the Washington Post’s Chris Cillizza reviewed the winners and losers of the evening speeches Pat Smith’s was nowhere on the list to be found.

They don’t call his column “The Fix” for nothing.

So I can confidently predict that the MSM will bury Pat Smith’s speech as minutia and when the post convention stories are written the single most devastating speech of day 1 (Rudy Giuliani not withstanding) to the cause of Hillary Clinton’s election to the White House will, as far as the MSM is concerned, be an afterthought that barely existed.

Unexpectedly.

Closing Thought, if I was Donald Trump and his surrogates I would be talking about Pat Smith’s speech at every chance I get both during and after the convention and I’d certainly turn her speech into an ad that I’d be running every night during the Democrat Convention and beyond.

Update: Via Glenn, Ricochet gets it:

Remember how Maureen Dowd talked about Patricia Smith’s ‘absolute moral authority?’

No, I don’t remember that either.

Because it didn’t happen.

Instead, Patricia Smith is being relentlessly ‘fact-checked’ this morning. By PolitiFact. By The Washington Post. And probably many more.

The crux of Patricia Smith’s argument is that Hillary is a liar who told her, more-or-less over the body of her dead son, that the ‘video’ was responsible for the Benghazi attacks. Mrs Smith believes that Hillary knew, at the time, that the Benghazi attacks were organized terrorism. And there is strong evidence to indicate that she did know that. Including an inconveniently discovered email to her own daughter, sent on the night of the attack.

Just as there is strong evidence to indicate that, for days afterwards, Hillary, along with the rest of the Obama administration, was telling lots of people, and even foreign governments, that the video was responsible for the attack.

So, why is it so hard to believe that she would have told Patricia Smith the same thing?


I’d like to think we do good work here If you’d like to help us keep up the pace please consider hitting DaTipJar




Olimometer 2.52

Please consider Subscribing. If less than 1/3 of 1% of our readers subscribed at $10 a month we’d have the 114.5 subscribers needed to our annual goal all year without solicitation.

Plus of course all subscribers get my weekly podcast emailed directly to you before it goes up anywhere else.


Choose a Subscription level



Employment Counsellor: …your report here says that you are an extremely dull person. You see, our experts describe you as an appallingly dull fellow, unimaginative, timid, lacking in initiative, spineless, easily dominated, no sense of humour, tedious company and irrepressibly drab and awful. And whereas in most professions these would be considerable drawbacks, in chartered accountancy they are a positive boon.

Monty Python’s Flying Circus 1969

There are a lot of considerations to be made when picking a vice president, does the candidate bring a state or a constituency? Can the candidate do the heavy lifting of attack? Would that candidate make a good president and does it placate a group that might not like the top of the ticket.

Donald Trump’s selection of Mike Pence fits some of those bills, He is strong on social issues and on faith (although he did fold like a cheap blanket on religious liberty) issues that Trump is weak on with. He has experience on both the state and federal level which is a plus, but the most interesting thing about Mike Pence that I think makes him a wise pick is this.

He’s dull.

Dull, dull my GOD he’s dull. You couldn’t have found a more white bread candidate if you went to a wonder bread bakery.

Now under normal circumstance such a characteristic would be a liability but for several reasons it’s a positive plus.

There is a 0% chance that a fellow like Pence is going to overshadow the Trump

There is only a tiny chance that Pence is going to make a critical mistake to hurt the ticket.

Pence can deal with the traditional fundraising wing of the party in a way that Trump can’t.

All of these attributes are good but there is one thing that he has already managed to do that bodes well.

He drives the left absolutely nuts!

Because Pence is a social conservative and an unapologetic Christian in an age where the media and the left culture believe abortion, gay marriage, transgenderism etc are sacraments he is the type of man who they absolutely loathe and this prompts attacks of incredible silliness.  Such as this from John Podesta:

“Pence is the most extreme pick in a generation and was one of the earliest advocates for the Tea Party.

Now the left calling a republican “extreme” is about as rare as me turning down a piece of Kentucky Derby Pie and in most election years they would get away with it, no trouble.

But can you, after a year of Donald Trump’s candidacy and after the um colorful adjectives thrown at him by the press the reaction of the general public to that same press pointing to Mike “Whitebread” Pence and shouting “extremist!”

Every single time they go after him I can see Trump on stage saying something like:  Have you heard the media talking about my VP pick?  They’re calling him an “extremist” I mean seriously, have you looked at this guy?

They’d be laughed out of the room.

Our friends in the media are already dealing with serious credibility issues that Mr. Trump has managed to highlight.  The attacks on Pence that the media  are sure to bring won’t help matters for them.

The Mask has dropped from Justice Ruth Ginsberg:

Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg says she doesn’t want to conjure up the possibility of Donald Trump in the White House.

“I can’t imagine what the country would be — with Donald Trump as our president,” Ginsburg told The New York Times in an interview published Sunday. “For the country, it could be four years. For the court, it could be — I don’t even want to contemplate that.”
Ginsburg, on the high court since 1993, told the Times the prospect of a Trump presidency reminded her of the type of wry comment her late husband might have made.
“‘Now it’s time for us to move to New Zealand,'” Justice Ginsburg said.

Not only did the mask of impartiality drop she refused to put it back on and doubled down:

Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s well-known candor was on display in her chambers late Monday, when she declined to retreat from her earlier criticism of Donald Trump and even elaborated on it.

“He is a faker,” she said of the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, going point by point, as if presenting a legal brief. “He has no consistency about him. He says whatever comes into his head at the moment. He really has an ego. … How has he gotten away with not turning over his tax returns? The press seems to be very gentle with him on that.”

As you might have heard this got some critique from Donald Trump but it also got a lot of critique from liberals as well:

The New York Times:

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg needs to drop the political punditry and the name-calling. …

In this election cycle in particular, the potential of a new president to affect the balance of the court has taken on great importance, with the vacancy left by the death of Justice Antonin Scalia. As Justice Ginsburg pointed out, other justices are nearing an age when retirement would not be surprising. That makes it vital that the court remain outside the presidential process. And just imagine if this were 2000 and the resolution of the election depended on a Supreme Court decision. Could anyone now argue with a straight face that Justice Ginsburg’s only guide would be the law?

The Washington Post

I first wrote about Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s controversial comments about Donald Trump on Monday. Since then, the situation has erupted into an all-out feud, and now the editorial boards of both the New York Times and The Washington Post have weighed in against Ginsburg’s decision to insert herself into the 2016 campaign…I’ll say at the top what I’ve said before: It’s hard if not impossible to find a direct analog to what Ginsburg has said in recent days. Supreme Court experts I’ve spoken to were unaware of any justices getting so directly and vocally involved — or involved at all, really — in a presidential campaign.

Slate:

There is really very little to debate about the ethics of Ginsburg’s comments. They were plainly a violation, the kind of partisan partiality that judicial ethics codes strive to prevent. But Ginsburg, who is a quietly canny judicial and political strategist, surely knows that her comments were an ethical error. That leads to a fascinating question: Why would the justice risk her reputation and good standing—and even her power to hear cases involving Trump—for a few quick jabs at the candidate? The answer, I suspect, is that Ginsburg has decided to sacrifice some of her prestige in order to send as clear a warning signal about Trump as she possibly can. The subtext of Ginsburg’s comments, of her willingness to comment, is that Trump poses an unparalleled threat to this country—a threat so great that she will abandon judicial propriety in order to warn against looming disaster.

To be clear, what Ginsburg is doing right now—pushing her case against Trump through on-the-record interviews—is not just unethical; it’s dangerous. As a general rule, justices should refrain from commenting on politics, period. That dictate applies to 83-year-old internet folk heroes as strictly as it applies to anybody else who dons judicial robes. The independence of our judiciary—and just as critically, its appearance of impartiality—hinges on a consistent separation between itself and the other branches of government. That means no proclamations of loyalty to any candidate, or admissions of distaste of any other.

Even CNN’s Jeffrey Toobin was not happy as reported by Newsbusters:

No, I don’t think there’s any chance she will resign, but I think it’s appropriate to criticize her about this. This is not how Supreme Court justices have talked traditionally. They do not get involved in day-to-day political controversies. They do not endorse or un-endorse candidates.

Describing himself as a “great admirer” of Justice Ginsburg, he then got to the subject of recusal as he added:

And I think there are lots of good reasons for that, not least of which, something involving the election may come before the Supreme Court in a Bush V. Gore type case. And I think she’d have to recuse herself at this point. 

I just think, as someone who is a great admirer of Justice Ginsburg, she is completely wrong in this situation, and she should not be making these kinds of political statements.

And cartoonists as well:

A lot of people are upset about this ethical violation.

I’m not.

Don’t get me wrong, it was a complete abrogation of her duty as a judge on the highest court in the land and an action unworthy of her and her position. Furthermore it sets a horrible precedent for the future.

However there is one other consideration.

If there is one thing that anyone who watches the court knows it that any 5-4 decision will involve a “conservative’ justice voting with liberals. You will not and have not seen any of the liberals, Kagan, Sotomayor or Ginsberg being the deciding vote for a case going in the direction of conservatives.

Justice Ginsberg’s public statements make it plan for all to see that our liberal friends on the Supreme Court are simple ideologues and that their vote on any key issue dividing left and right would be no different if every brief in support of the liberal position consisted of the sentence: “All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy.” repeated ad infinitum.

Ann Althouse gets it

In the case of Justice Ginsburg, Trump isn’t inferring bias and politics from whatgroup she belongs to. It’s a reaction to her particular statements. It’s individual. She openly displayed her political leanings and her desire for political allies on the Court and her intent, going forward, to use those allies to get to a majority that would overrule cases that recognize important constitutional rights — includingHeller, the case that says there is an individual right to bear arms.

And here’s where it becomes clear that the NYT editorial proceeds upon the second reason I posited above, that Justice Ginsburg’s particular political statements are dangerous and damaging to the political cause she and the NYT support. “In this election cycle in particular,” it’s important to keep voters believing that judges will be impartial and above politics, and here’s Ginsburg “call[ing] her own commitment to impartiality into question.” The Times tries to pass this off as Ginsburg “choos[ing] to descend toward [Trump’s] level,” but she’s not joining Trump, she’s proving him right: Judges are political, and that’s a bad thing. Perhaps Curiel didn’t deserve the criticism, but Ginsburg does, and it’s very irritating to the NYT, it would seem, because the Curiel incident was so effectively used against Trump, and then along comes Ginsburg displaying herself as pleased to be political.

Justice Ginsburg unethical behavior has provided a valuable service to the entire nature by allowing them to see that lie that the NY Times and other want to keep hidden.  The question becomes will the American people react the way the NYT and the left fears they will?

One can only hope but no matter how they do, rest assured the American people will get the president and the justice system we deserve.

Sorta Update: Justice Ginsburg has finally figured out she was not helping her cause.

Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said Thursday she regrets remarks she made earlier this week to CNN and other news outlets criticizing presumptive Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump.

“On reflection, my recent remarks in response to press inquiries were ill-advised and I regret making them,” Ginsburg said in a statement. “Judges should avoid commenting on a candidate for public office. In the future I will be more circumspect.”

The best part of this non-apology is it allowed Donald Trump the high ground in response:

“It wasn’t really an apology, but we have to move on anyway. It’s just something that should not have taken place,” the presumptive GOP presidential nominee said.

“It’s just a very disappointing moment for me because the Supreme Court is above that kind of rhetoric, those words. … But she acknowledged she made a mistake, and I’ll accept that.”

The greatest ally Trump has in this election are the people who oppose him.


I’d like to think we do good work here If you’d like to help us keep up the pace please consider hitting DaTipJar




Olimometer 2.52

Please consider Subscribing. If less than 1/3 of 1% of our readers subscribed at $10 a month we’d have the 114.5 subscribers needed to our annual goal all year without solicitation.

Plus of course all subscribers get my weekly podcast emailed directly to you before it goes up anywhere else.


Choose a Subscription level



One of the advantages of being a liberal who covers conservatives (and actually mixes with them) is perspective and at the Washington Post Dave Weigel brightly illustrates the difference between being owned by a campaign and not. (emphasis mine)

In outrage mode, it was easy to ignore something Clinton spokesman Jake Sullivan said in his reaction. Trump didn’t just praise Hussein. He “yet again lauded” him. As the Post’s Jenna Johnson pointed out, Trump had used this language many, many times, with plenty of cameras pointed at him. The narrowing of the field, the fact that the rally was on prime time television — some of that contributed to the furor, which began before anyone from team Clinton spoke out.

And remember many of those speeches were televised by the same media outlets that are now shocked Shocked at his words:

By consistently covering Trump’s argument over time, and by following up on it, media outlets did their job to inform voters. That was why Tuesday night’s collective Captain Renault moment was so strange, and so demonstrative of why many media consumers are skeptical of what they’re hearing. Instead of a debate on the facts — should Hussein have been removed? Did he “kill terrorists,” in a contradiction of what Americans were told before the war? — there was manufactured outrage, straight from a rival campaign.

or as a Daily Mail reporter quoted by Dave put it:

Actually I disagree, there is nothing at all remarkable about it, it’s the standard operating procedure of the media in full Clinton protection mode and Dave Weigel deserves a lot of credit for noting it, particularly for doing so at the Washington Post.

However unfortunately for all those media outlets because they DID carry so many of those Trump rallies live their viewers likely have likely seen Mr. Trump say these words before and have come to the same conclusion that Dave Weigel did.

It’s very hard to define your opponent when you’ve already allowed him to define himself.

Believe it or not via Memeorandum and not Instapundit

One thing about news stories that do not involve national figures is the question of what constitutes a “National” story and what constitutes a local story.

For example all of the various shootings of black youths in Chicago constitute “local” stories because they

Do not advance the liberal narrative

Don not  constitute an issue that reflects favorably on Democrats

Can not be spun or exploited to use against the GOP

Meanwhile the Michael Brown case constituted a national story because facts notwithstanding it could be used to advance the liberal narrative and be spun and exploited for use against the GOP.

Given those facts can you guess if this story is a “Local” or a “National” one

Durham County’s Fraternal Order of Police is demanding an apology from a councilwoman after she posted to Facebook saying “the most dangerous people with guns are cops and soldiers.”

Jillian Johnson made the post, which has since been deleted, to her personal Facebook page Monday.

It read:

“I am all about keeping guns away from dangerous people, but I feel like more of us should be pointing out that the most dangerous people with guns are cops and soldiers, and that the no-fly list and FBI anti-terror efforts are seriously corrupted by entrapment, racial profiling and Islamophobia.”

Johnson posted a clarification Wednesday morning to her professional Facebook page.

Yes you guessed it, this is a local story because

It involves a democrat attacking police and soldiers

It involves a democrat suggesting they are more dangerous than islamists after the 2nd most successful islamic terror attack on US soil.

All of these things would be easy to exploit in a senate or house races and fits like a glove for the Donald Trump campaign.

Rest assured that if this had been a republican saying something as offensive as this every single GOP candidate in races across the nation would be questioned about them and asked if they support such statements even though the speaker was a city selectman with no connection to any other party member elsewhere in the state let alone anywhere else in the country.

A lot of commentary has already been written about Donald Trump’s speech yesterday however there are three particular points that are worth repeating.

1. Follow the money

Donald Trump made a point of stressing how Hillary Clinton has acquired her wealth. While stressing her time in the State Department the entire line of attack is brilliant because it reminds everyone of the contrast. Donald Trump a businessman who has made his fortune building things, vs Hillary Clinton whose entire fortune is derivative of her Husband’s time in the White House and her time in the Senate.

A fortune built on special interests seeking favors.

This is something that Bernie Sanders people have been stressing from day one and Trump’s speech will remind each of those voters exactly what they dislike and distrust about Mrs. Clinton.

2. Oh those tell on books

For a week the Drudge Report has been talking about a new tell all book Crisis of Character: A White House Secret Service Officer Discloses His Firsthand Experience with Hillary, Bill, and How They Operate. The media has made a concerted effort to ignore this book by a secret service agent on the Clinton details as such a person would be a credible witness to her corruption.

While Trump did not bring up that book he did in his attack on the Clinton finances bring up the book Clinton Cash yet another book that the MSM did its best to ignore.

This will, thanks to the media attention to the speech, produce searches and those searches will put both books in the public eye.

3. Democrat Inner Cities Success Stories

If there is one thing that is pretty consistent nationwide it’s that the inner cities, which contain a high proportion of black and latino voters, are completely and utterly controlled by the Democrat Party.

And Donald Trump reminded voters watching their state:

I have visited the cities and towns across America and seen the devastation caused by the trade policies of Bill and Hillary Clinton.

Inner cities, which have been horribly abused by Hillary Clinton and the Democrat Party, will finally be rebuilt.

and contrasted that to what he plans to do:

Parents are going to start dreaming big for their children again – including parents in our inner cities.

Every moment spent reminding blacks and Hispanics of the state of the cities run by their Democrat friends is a chance to make inroads that the rest of the GOP can only dream of.

More please

Cardinal Borusa: As I believe I told you long ago, Doctor, you will never amount to anything in the galaxy while you retain your propensity for vulgar facetiousness.

Doctor Who: The Deadly Assassin 1976

As you, dear reader might have noticed I have an odd and occasionally twisted sense of humor that has its roots in a combination of the Three Stooges, Monty Python, augmented with a bit of the Marx brothers, 60’s TV military humor (F Troop & McHale’s Navy and Hogan’s Heroes) and assorted British Humor (Black Adder, Yes Minister, Red Dwarf) for good measure.  This sense is occasionally wildly inappropriate & even bordering on a violation of the 2nd Commandment requiring confession although I insist that God has a sense of humor evidenced by his creation of man).

What you may not know is that it occasionally takes a large amount of effort to resist deploying that humor either verbally or physical when such things occur to me on the spur of the moment.  One such moment took place at the during the CIS event at the National Press Club.

During a rather excellent presentation I found the call of nature stronger than the pull of Mark’s presentation and had to excuse myself hurriedly to the rest room, arriving there I found the men’s room was being cleaned and at the time I did not know the location of the alternative.

That’s when it hit me.

I was in Washington DC, a bastion of ultra liberalism, furthermore I was in the national press club and organization whose members have adopted liberal identity politics even to the point of the absurdity that if one does not accept the far left’s meme on the Transgender bathroom business you were a bigot, practically an unperson.

What would happen if instead of asking one of the very friendly staff of the press club I simply used the ladies room?

How would the press club react?  How COULD they react?  Surely the fact that I wearing a fedora , dressed in a suit and tie and clearly had not shaved (I forgot to pack razors) had no bearing on my sexual identity?  In fact those members of the press club unfamiliar with Doctor Who in general and the Fourth Doctor in particular might have decided my long multi colored scarf  (known as a  “doctor who” scarf) was a sign of membership or at least affinity in the LGBT community.

After all there are many events at the press club, many highly populated by liberals, what would a liberal woman say seeing me in the ladies room?
Would she dare question me, confront me, or even give me an odd look? Would she dare say a word to the people in charge?  Or would the fear of being accused of a proper lack of diversity drive her to silence?  She might find herself ashamed at even thinking such a thing and instead brag to her friends how accepting it was for her to be “comfortable” with a 270 man in the ladies room with her. Accommodating me was the ultimate in virtue signaling and if she was a proper liberal, particularly a liberal reporter tell the story with pride to everyone she knew.

On the other hand what if she DID report me?

Would the staff dare confront me? What would they say if I refused to give an explanation?  What would they do if they asked me my sexual orientation and I told them it was bluntly that not only was it none of their bus but how DARE they even question me upon it?  How would such a story play in the very papers where the member of that press club excoriate those who insist that there is in fact such a thing as men and women and act accordingly? Would they risk being seen as on the wrong side of an issue that the Democrat party is playing for all it is worth?

The comic potential for this decision was seemingly limitless!

Alas it was not to be, my comedic nature was overcome by my sense of prosperity, particularly as an invited guest and instead I asked someone where the other men’s room was and went there.

But I can’t help but think that it would be an interesting experiment, not only at the press club but at any liberal institution to see what might happen in that situation.

It would be fun to find out wouldn’t it, but it will take someone less invested in proprietary to do so.


While CIS kindly sponsored my attendance at their event there are still quite a few incidental expenses involved, not the least of which was the loss of two days pay from my regular job (my thanks to them BTW for permitting me the time off to accept CIS’ invitation)

Additionally and as you might have noticed with 2016 nearly 50% complete our annual goal for DaTipJar is only at 19.6%

If you like the interviews you see here over the next day or two and the work done here by me and my magnificent seven bloggers in general please consider hitting DaTipJar




Olimometer 2.52

Consider Subscribing. All subscribers get my weekly podcast emailed directly to you before it goes up anywhere else.

If less than 1/3 of 1% of our readers subscribed at $10 a month we’d have the 114.5 subscribers needed to our annual goal all year without solicitation.

If we can somehow double our annual goal then I would be a position to cover national events without requiring the sponsorship of the groups putting them on to attend.


Choose a Subscription level



Until that day if you are an organization or individual who likes the coverage / interviews you see here and wish to sponsor me to cover your / an event anywhere in the nation you can contact me here.