My wife came home from the Hospital Monday evening and Tuesday was spent running around to do everything from getting her car inspected (and arranging for repairs when it failed) securing a recliner for her to sleep on as she can’t manage the stairs, helping with changing her dressings and cleaning her wounds, while keeping up with the basic housework so I found myself crashing during the Trump speech and didn’t watch it until the rerun at midnight (when I had to wake her for her antibiotic).

We had months of the media and the left painting Donald Trump as the 2nd coming of Hitler, we’ve had the media whining like a stuck pig when they were hit, we had Nancy Pelosi warning her crowd not to should out “you lie” everyone was braced for a circus as the media reported that the left was ready to troll him…

…and then he spoke and reality set in.

The American people not only saw they had a president, a competent and organized president who knows what he wants to do, and those Americans not only saw Trump for what he was, those same Americans who have been watching people go absolutely nuts, protesting, screaming, needing therapy by his very existence saw these folk, who have been lionized and promoted by the media, for who and what they are: deluded, dangerous and deranged.

How bad was it for the Democrats? This screen shot from the speech illustrates their dilemma.

Now it’s not unusual for the party in opposition to refrain from standing and clapping when the President speaks but what is the line Democrats are all sitting for while the GOP is standing and clapping?

Free nations are the best vehicle for expressing the will of the people – and America respects the right of all nations to chart their own path.

My job is not to represent the world.

My job is to represent the United States of America. emphasis mine

How do you convince a nation to vote for your candidates, to hire your people for the job of governing if the very idea that the person they hire should represent the people who hired him or her is anathema to your party?

Why did they sit? Because their party has become so radical, so extreme, so hateful that to stand for such a statement would be to invite a primary challenger, particularly for those in the bluest of blue states. In fact it wouldn’t surprise me to see some blowback on those who stood when when the president said we need to work with, not against those in law enforcement.

What is the ultimate proof of this thesis? The Democrat response was not given by a potential presidential candidate such as an Elizabeth Warren, not by one of their sitting governors such as Washington’s Jay Inslee. Not even by a longtime member of the Congressional Black Caucus like John Lewis.

No the Democrat response was given by a 72 year old former governor of a state who was replaced by a republican in the last election by a vote that shocked the media.

Why did they choose an old white guy, older than President Trump from a red border/southern state to respond rather than a sitting office holder? I suspect because the party couldn’t risk the American people seeing a radical response from a Democrat true believer nor would any individual Democrat risk giving a measured clam speech that would offend their base.

To be sure there were individual bits that people can disagree with and might argue about, but while this speech was given to the congress, it was directed to the American people and those who watched it liked what they saw:

President Donald Trump’s first address to Congress received largely positive reviews from viewers, with 57% who tuned in saying they had a very positive reaction to the speech, according to a new CNN/ORC poll of speech-watchers.

Nearly 7-in-10 who watched said the President’s proposed policies would move the country in the right direction and almost two-thirds said the president has the right priorities for the country. Overall, about 7-in-10 said the speech made them feel more optimistic about the direction of the country.

And yet in the very next paragraph, CNN felt compelled to downplay and discredit their own poll and explain said support away

The survey, conducted among a group of Americans who said in interviews conducted before the speech that they planned to watch and agreed to be re-contacted, only reflects the views of those who watched the speech, not of all Americans.

That’s how upset they are.

Now tomorrow things will be much as they were before. President Trump will continue to tweet, the media will continue to hit him and he’ll hit back, the hollywood and education sectors will continue to excoriate him and the protests against him will soldier on and cable news networks will continue to highlight and promote any person who opposes President Trump and turn taking a picture on a couch into the next great outrage.

But most of the rest of the country, the part that is too busy to live and die by what these people say, will go back to their lives reassured that the country is in safe hands.

2016 Fabulous 50 Blog Awards

Over the next couple of weeks a lot of hospital bills and debt from work that both my wife and I are going to be missing because of the complications from her “routine” surgery will be coming due.

If you are able and inclined to help mitigate them I’d ask you to consider hitting DaTipJar




Olimometer 2.52

Please consider Subscribing. You can be listed as a Friend of DaTechguy blog for as little as $2 a week. If only 130 of the 209K+ unique visitors who came in 2016 .07% subscribed at the same levels as our current subscription base we would make our current annual goal with ease. If we could boost that number to 260 I could afford to cover major events in person all over the country.

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


Choose a Subscription level



If you are not in the position to hit DaTipJar We will be very happy to accept your prayers

Donald Trump listened to an attack on him at the 2011 White House Correspondents’ Association dinner.

The White House Correspondents’ Association Dinner is one of the most immoral events in journalism.

Every spring, celebrities, journalists and politicians have engaged in a romance that undermines a pivotal reason for the press: to comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable.

Although President Trump may have his own reasons for not attending the dinner in April, I applaud anyone who avoids this breach of journalistic ethics.

The event, which is meant to raise money for scholarships and to recognize journalistic accomplishments, has drifted from its original mission when the association was founded in 1914. According to the association’s website, the organization held its first dinner in 1920. Calvin Coolidge became the first of 14 presidents to attend the affair.

As I wrote four years ago in The Washington Times, if the event were a government program, most Washington reporters would have been howling to shut it down. Here is the rest of that column:
http://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/apr/24/harper-correspondents-dinner-comforts-the-comforta/

Two years ago, the dinner occurred in during the Baltimore riots. Here’s what I wrote for The Washington Times then: The juxtaposition of the riots in Baltimore this weekend as “all-news” television networks delivered extensive coverage of the White House Correspondents’ Association’s soiree underlined the disconnect between the press and the rest of the country. For the rest of the rant, it’s here:
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/apr/29/christopher-harper-baltimore-riots-forgotten-as-ne/

Somehow the dinner has achieved the “moral high ground” as some news organizations have pulled out in an apparent protest of Trump’s presidency, while an actor is giving an “alt” dinner.

The dinner will never have any moral basis.

It’s thought that the attacks at the 2011 dinner on Trump, who looked on stoically,  may have played a role in his decision to run for the presidency.

Here is a report on that dinner:

“Donald Trump is here tonight!” President Obama began amiably. “I know that he’s taken some flak lately. But no one is happier, no one is prouder, to put this birth certificate matter to rest than The Donald.” Trump could be seen smiling. “And that’s because he can finally get back to focusing on the issues that matter—like, did we fake the moon landing? What really happened in Roswell? And where are Biggie and Tupac?”

Trump’s smile was beginning to stiffen.

“All kidding aside,” Obama went on in a sober deadpan, “obviously we know about your credentials and breadth of experience.” At this, ripples of laughter coursed through the crowd of 3,000. The ripples built into waves, lapping at Trump’s table. “For example—seriously—in an episode of Celebrity Apprentice, at the steakhouse, the men’s cooking team did not impress the judges from Omaha Steaks,” the president continued. “And there was a lot of blame to go around. But you, Mr. Trump, recognized that the real problem was a lack of leadership. And so ultimately you didn’t blame Little John or Meatloaf. You fired Gary Busey. And these are the kinds of decisions that would keep me up at night.”

The waves of laughter built into a tsunami. And then into a deafening roar. And then cheers! There was a sickly grin plastered on Trump’s face, as it dawned on even him that the president of the United States had made a fool of him, and the whole world was laughing.

“Well-handled, sir! Well-handled!” Obama added, driving in the blade.

“Say what you will about Mr. Trump, he certainly would bring some change to the White House,” Obama noted. On the four jumbotrons hanging from the ceiling, there flashed a cartoon depicting the executive mansion and its grounds transformed into a hotel/casino/golf course complex with bikinied babes hoisting cocktails on the lawn and a huge garish neon sign advertising “Trump. The White House. Presidential Suite.”

Well, President Trump got the last laugh. And, his decision not to attend this year’s event may finally bring about the end of this abhorrent media event.

If you want to understand how the MSM operates the best illustration comes from this very short video

Because why talk to one of 10,000 conservatives excited to be at CPAC or speak with attendees and shoot dozens of videos with them to find out what they think if they support Trump when you can find one Nazi looking for publicity and paint all those who dare support your opponent in the White House with that brush?

Alas for them CPAC was smart enough not to play that game.

Well, things aren’t going too well for white nationalist Richard Spencer who showed up at CPAC today:

Spencer replied that Grizzly Joe is a moron who can’t dress: And shortly after this exchange, Spencer was kicked out of CPAC:

While not as important as the video above the next two videos show the pack mentality in action.

The best thing to do in that situation? Abandon the pack!

I think I’d rather be out there interviewing a dozen folks in attendance rather than losing 40 minutes in the hope of getting one shot as part of the crowd.

If you’re interested in telling your readers a story rather than saying “look at me I’m media!” that’s the way to go.

Update of course I have my own fake news story but that’s for tomorrow.


DaTechGuy at CPAC 2017 (all videos not blogged about yet here)

2/24
Voices of CPAC 2017 Donald Trump Single lines from CPAC speech as he makes them
Voices of CPAC 2017 the Indefatigable Kira Innis

2/23
Voices of Cpac 2017 Steve & Shen, Ed Morrissey of Hotair and a Kellyanne Conway Cannoli Story
Voices of CPAC 2017 Radio Row Sharon Angle & Rick Trader Daria Novak & Frank Vernuccio
CPAC 2017 Photos & Brief videos from the Sean Hannity Taping

Voices at CPAC 2017 Advocates: Melissa of Able Americans, Matt of American Majority
Voices at CPAC 2017 Yvonne (from almost #NeverTrump to Evangelical Coordinator) & Michael
Voices of CPAC 2017 Joe on Life behind the Berlin Wall

2/22

Voices at CPAC 2017 Liz a Cook County Republican (and Kasich delegate)
CPAC 2017 First Interviews Theresa an Attendee and Rob Eno of Conservative Review

2/21
Some Quick pre-cpac video and thoughts

2016 Fabulous 50 Blog Awards

If you like the work I have done at CPAC and wish to support it (along with paying for the ER & Surgery bills for DaWife’s illness that our insurance doesn’t anymore (thanks Democrats and Obamacare!) please consider hitting DaTipJar




Olimometer 2.52

Please consider Subscribing. You can be listed as a Friend of DaTechguy blog for as little as $2 a week. If only 130 of the 209K+ unique visitors who came in 2016 .07% subscribed at the same levels as our current subscription base we would make our current annual goal with ease. If we could boost that number to 260 I could afford to cover major events in person all over the country.

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


Choose a Subscription level



On CPAC Day one after Hannity I headed down radio row where I saw a familiar face

Angle may have failed to beat Harry Reid in 2012 and got a lot of grief over it, but then again if she had won then we might not have seen the nuclear option from Harry and Donald Trump’s current cabinet picks would have been dead on arrival.

The Lord works in mysterious ways.

I then talked to the team of Daria Novak & Frank Vernuccio who do both Radio and TV

Daria also ran for congress in CT

We’ll see more from Radio row later

DaTechGuy at CPAC 2017 (all videos not blogged about yet here)

2/23
CPAC 2017 Photos & Brief videos from the Sean Hannity Taping
Voices at CPAC 2017 Advocates: Melissa of Able Americans, Matt of American Majority
Voices at CPAC 2017 Yvonne (from almost #NeverTrump to Evangelical Coordinator) & Michael
Voices of CPAC 2017 Joe on Life behind the Berlin Wall

2/22

Voices at CPAC 2017 Liz a Cook County Republican (and Kasich delegate)
CPAC 2017 First Interviews Theresa an Attendee and Rob Eno of Conservative Review

2/21
Some Quick pre-cpac video and thoughts


2016 Fabulous 50 Blog Awards

If you like the work I have done at CPAC and wish to support it (along with paying for the ER & Surgery bills for DaWife’s illness that our insurance doesn’t anymore (thanks Democrats and Obamacare!) please consider hitting DaTipJar




Olimometer 2.52

Please consider Subscribing. You can be listed as a Friend of DaTechguy blog for as little as $2 a week. If only 130 of the 209K+ unique visitors who came in 2016 .07% subscribed at the same levels as our current subscription base we would make our current annual goal with ease. If we could boost that number to 260 I could afford to cover major events in person all over the country.

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


Choose a Subscription level



On Day one of CPAC while working in the Hotel Lobby I met Yvonne from Chicago who gave me a long interview.

Her story which took her from considering “Never Trump” to being an Illinois coordinator for the Trump campaign is not only interesting but to this writing is the greatest swing of any of the people I’ve interviewed as of this writing (5:30 AM Tuesday).

By an odd coincidence I ran into Wjj Hodge just after the interview, he had already registered and suggested lunch and invited Yvonne to join us, as media registration had begun I asked if William would wait a moment while I check in & Yvonne left to do the same. Her line was long & at the suggestion of the CPAC volunteers she decided to wait in it in case we came back to a longer one. The media line was very long (although not as long as hers) so I headed back to William and that’s where I met Michael from Chicago whose wife and run for congress and while like Yvonne was a Cruz supporter in the primaries had a much easier transition to Donald Trump.

He joined us for lunch instead and by the time it was over he became, in addition to an occasional contributor for the American Thinker the latest member of DaTechGuy’s ever growing Magnificent Seven. I’m thinking alternate Monday’s to Michigan Mick.

DaTechGuy at CPAC 2017 (all videos not blogged about yet here)

2/23

Voices of CPAC 2017 Joe on Life behind the Berlin Wall

2/22

Voices at CPAC 2017 Liz a Cook County Republican (and Kasich delegate)
CPAC 2017 First Interviews Theresa an Attendee and Rob Eno of Conservative Review

2/21
Some Quick pre-cpac video and thoughts


2016 Fabulous 50 Blog Awards

If you like the work I have done at CPAC and wish to support it (along with paying for the ER & Surgery bills for DaWife’s illness that our insurance doesn’t anymore (thanks Democrats and Obamacare!) please consider hitting DaTipJar




Olimometer 2.52

Please consider Subscribing. You can be listed as a Friend of DaTechguy blog for as little as $2 a week. If only 130 of the 209K+ unique visitors who came in 2016 .07% subscribed at the same levels as our current subscription base we would make our current annual goal with ease. If we could boost that number to 260 I could afford to cover major events in person all over the country.

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


Choose a Subscription level




Jeffrey Medford, a small-business owner in South Carolina, voted reluctantly for Donald Trump.

Medford should be a natural ally for liberals trying to convince the country that Trump was a bad choice. But it is not working out that way. Every time Medford dips into the political debate — either with strangers on Facebook or friends in New York and Los Angeles — he comes away feeling battered by contempt and an attitude of moral superiority.

“We’re backed into a corner,” said Medford, 46, whose business teaches people to be filmmakers. “You’re an idiot if you support any part of Trump.’”

The story above appeared in The New York Times. Like a broken clock, the “newspaper of record” can be right twice a day. Well, twice a day may be a bit over the top.

But here is some more of the article:

Liberals may feel energized by a surge in political activism, and a unified stance against a president they see as irresponsible and even dangerous. But that momentum is provoking an equal and opposite reaction on the right.

“The name calling from the left is crazy,” said Bryce Youngquist, 34, who works in sales for a tech start-up in Mountain View, Calif., a liberal enclave where admitting you voted for Trump. “They are complaining that Trump calls people names, but they turned into some mean people.”

Youngquist did not put a bumper sticker on his car, for fear it would be keyed. The only place he felt comfortable wearing his Make America Great Again hat was on vacation in China.

He came out a few days before the election. On election night, a friend posted on Facebook, “You are a disgusting human being.”

“They were making me want to support him more with how irrational they were being,” Youngquist said.

Like many Trump supporters, I have been shamed by some of the same people who display yard signs that say: “Hate Has No Home Here.”

In academia, I have to sit through meetings, which have nothing to do with politics, that include numerous jabs at Trump supporters. I have come up with a few responses to Trump bashers:

–Statement: Hillary won the popular vote!
–My response: Then start a movement to amend the U.S. Constitution to eliminate the Electoral College.
–Statement: The right wing is taking over!
–My response: It’s not about right or left; it’s about failed policies.
–Statement: It’s Bush’s fault!
–My response: He left office almost a decade ago. Move on!
–Statement: Trump supporters are stupid racists!
–My response: Trump beat Clinton in these demographics: white, college-educated and 65 and over. That’s me! Do you really think I’m a stupid racist?

Nevertheless, I would like to thank liberals and leftists for pushing people firmly into the Trump camp!

Here is the complete story in The New York Times: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/18/opinion/sunday/are-liberals-helping-trump.html


Christopher Harper teaches media law.

There are two major things that should concern the American people about mainstream media. We’ve seen one of them very blatantly rear its hypocritical head since the start of election season in 2015: major left-wing bias. The other is even more dangerous and if we don’t take hold of the first, we’ll be faced with the second.

Before we get into the more severe threat of mainstream media, let’s focus on the one that’s clear and present. Mainstream media has been “left-leaning” for over four decades. Some may remember a time when the media was actually right-leaning. Those days are obviously behind us; anyone who doesn’t qualify for Social Security benefits has likely never seen right-leaning mainstream media (other than arguably Fox News and WSJ) in their adult life. The major shift that we witnessed in the most recent election cycle is unabashed bias. There was still a semblance of subtly in their bias during the Bush43-era. Today, they’re loud and proud about being leftists.

There are righteous cries by conservatives to do something about this problem. The Democratic Party’s propaganda wing has become so engrossed with their own rhetoric that they’re having a hard time understanding why there’s any opposition to them at all. It’s imperative that conservatives do what they can to simultaneously denounce mainstream media’s bias and to promote independent and conservative media that needs help in being the countermeasure to liberal talking heads.

It must be the people who bring about this change. It cannot be the government. This brings us to the bigger threat that could engulf us: state-run media. Today, it’s practically impossible for anyone to imagine a press that’s controlled by the government. It’s never been the case in America (despite rumored efforts by the “Deep State,” the CIA, and other powerful government entities) for the government to have control over the media, so very few are concerned about it. We should be.

If recent history has taught us anything, it’s that the sentiment of the American people can be shifted very quickly. In the beginning of Barack Obama’s presidency, nearly 70% of Americans opposed same-sex marriage. Even Californians outlawed it for a time. Today, less than 40% of Americans oppose it. In less than seven years, the sentiment on this topic was changed through liberal indoctrination in colleges, massive propaganda campaigns in the media, and pressure put on those who would oppose the practice.

What we’re seeing happening with the media is not indoctrination from one side. Both liberals and conservatives are starting to see needs for “restraints” on the media. Not to sound too conspiratorial, but the rise of the “fake news” narrative is designed to get us to not trust ANY media. There has always been fake news. In fact, it’s not any worse today than it was a decade ago. The difference is that we’ve put more of an emphasis on it through social media. We’ve given it a tangible name and defined it as a bogeyman to be feared.

Tearing down the 1st Amendment freedom of the press concept won’t start off as state-run media. It will start as “limits” to what can be reported. It has already started with calls by powerful people in government to rein in their reports by forcing verification before news can be published. This comes in the form of strengthening libel laws that yield consequences if reporters get a story wrong. All of this is being packaged in a way that the people can get behind without realizing that they’re supporting restraints that harm the Constitution itself.

The problems of fake news and liberal bias are real. The battle must be waged by the people, not the government. If we call for the government to take action, the only way they can solve the problem is by taking us several steps closer to the bigger problem of state-run media. Instead, we have the power as Americans to fight it through our voices and our dollars. I would love to help lead this effort, but there’s already too much on my plate. Someone needs to do it. Someone needs to step up and start directing the grassroots to fight the liberal bias and fake news problem without the government getting involved.

Mainstream media outlets must be made aware that if they’re going to be biased, they won’t get our money nor our page-views in the form of clicks. That’s not to say that there’s not room for commentary or op-eds, but those must be clearly delineated. Smaller media sites, particularly those who adhere to neutrality, need our support. As for conservative media, we’re currently outnumbered and outgunned. We need help to be the commentary that opposes our liberal counterparts.

All of this sounds hard. It will be. The alternative is for the government to step in and take action. That is not a valid solution. Once they start, history tells us they cannot help themselves. They’ll take it further and further until the media is a shell of what it once was. To those who say that this would be a good thing, remember that if they’re just a shell, someone will be pulling the strings. I’ll take a left-wing mainstream media over a government-controlled media any day of week. At least bias can be countered through discernment and spreading the word. Once the government gets involved, it quickly turns into oppression. If that’s allowed, it will be almost impossible to reverse.

The only righteous way to tackle the problems we’re seeing in the media is for the people to address it from the grassroots. Calls for media oversight from DC will not end well for Americans. We need a free press to stay free. We need free Americans to change the media’s ways with our voices and our dollars. We do not need anything that will harm the 1st Amendment regardless of how appealing that may seem to some today.

Blogger at the home of a Forgotten Man

By John Ruberry

Donald J. Trump’s presidential honeymoon with the media lasted sixteen minutes, which was, not coincidentally, the length of his inauguration address.

Since then, the media, with a few exceptions, has been relentlessly attacking the president, and by media, I’ll use the definition Rush Limbaugh gave this morning to Chris Wallace on Fox News Sunday, which is ABC, CBS, NBC, the New York Times, the Washington Post and USA Today.

I’ll add one more–a big one, CNN, sometimes called the Clinton News Network.

The media is striking back with an assault on the presidency not seen since the height of the Watergate scandal.

And Donald Trump is fighting them–and the media can’t ascertain why much of the public, their public, is siding with the president.

Because conservatives don’t like cheaters.

Among the damning revelations from the John Podesta emails hacked by WikiLeaks was clear evidence of collusion by some of these allegedly neutral outlets during the 2016 presidential campaign, most notoriously when CNN analyst Donna Brazile twice supplied a planned question to the Hillary Clinton campaign prior to a CNN-hosted debate with Bernie Sanders.

Viewers of those two CNN debates were cheated by CNN, which employed Brazile, as they rightly expected the Clinton-Sanders matchups to be, let’s use a popular term from the time when several Chicago White Sox players conspired to throw the 1919 World Series, “on the square.” Sure, Brazile, was fired, but only after she was caught the second time feeding a debate question to the Clinton machine. That says a lot. Oh, where did Brazile learn of these questions? Did they come from a low-level CNN staffer?

Liberals, with the possible exception of the most ardent members of the growing socialist wing of the Democratic Party, dismissed Brazile’s cheating as just the way the game is played, which is not how White Sox fans greeted news of the 1919 fix broke a year later.

Before there was fake news there was a fake World Series.

Here is my conservative-or-liberal litmus test: If you were angry–or still are angry–about media collusion with the Democratic Party during the 2016 campaign, they you are a conservative. If you are not, they you’re a liberal. It’s that easy.

Which explains why the media, again using the definition I gave earlier, is astounded that Trump not only attacks them millions of Americans are cheering him on.

After dutifully reporting on media collusion immediately after it was revealed, the media promptly ignored the scandal–their scandal–which is not the case with Russian interference, and yes, alleged hacking of the election by Russia of the presidential election, whatever that entails. It probably entails nothing. WikiLeaks’ founder, Julian Assange, repeatedly insists that Russia was not the source of the hacked Podesta emails.

Okay, you skeptics out there, you are probably thinking to yourselves that I am citing only two examples of CNN collusion, and that done by an analyst, not a reporter.

Still still for a moment. CNN’s Wolf Blitzer and Jake Tapper, both of them anchors, the latter is the network’s Washington correspondent, were caught colluding by WikiLeaks. Other colluders captured in the WikiLeaks net were the New York Times and CNBC’s John Harwood, the Washington Post’s Dana Milbank, Glenn Thrush, then of Politico and now of the New York Times, and Brent Budowsky of The Hill.

When Trump said on the stump “the system is rigged,” the colluders proved him right.

The Forgotten Man and the Forgotten Woman, that is, the people who play by the rules and try to make an honest living under increasingly daunting odds, elected Trump, despite the rigging.

John “Lee” Ruberry of the Magnificent Seven

And the cheating media still can’t figure out why most Americans despise them.

You Democratic cynics are probably still thinking, “Everyone does it.” No they don’t. Very few media outlets are conservative ones, so the opportunity simply isn’t there for Republicans to collude. The only instance of GOP collusion in a presidential campaign I can recall is George Will’s vague self-described “inappropriate” role in the 1980 Debategate micro-scandal.

John Ruberry regularly blogs at Marathon Pundit.

The New York Times asked me for my opinion about their news coverage, so I gave it to them with both barrels.

As a subscriber to the digital edition of The Times, I became one of the “lucky” candidates to spend more than an hour answering dozens of questions about the newspaper and myriad other issues.

Although the survey is not intended to serve as a scientifically based poll, the bias oozed from the questions.

For example, here’s one question: What three words best describe your initial reaction to Donald Trump winning the election? I doubt that elated sprung to others’ minds like it did for me!

Another one: Which of the following best describes Donald Trump when it comes to “sticking to the facts?”

–Sticks to the facts better than most politicians
–Sticks to the facts about as well as any politician
–Plays it more “fast and loose” when it comes to facts
–There has never been a major politician as devoid (or empty) of facts as him

When the survey asked for my opinion about The New York Times, I was asked to compare it with Fox News, the Drudge Report and Bloomberg News. That seemed like an extremely odd combination. I understand that the news organization thinks it competes with the world, The Wall Street Journal and The Washington Post seem like better comparable news organizations.

But then I got some red meat!

Question: How often do you come across news stories about politics and government online that you think are not fully accurate?

–Never
–Hardly ever
–Sometimes
–Often [My obvious choice].

Question: And how often do you come across news stories about politics and government online that you think are almost completely made up? Check. Often.

Question: What three words best describes your feelings about the news media and news organizations right now?

My answer: unreliable, biased, partisan

Question: In general, what is your overall impression of the news media and news organizations?

Very unfavorable [check].
–Somewhat unfavorable
–Neither unfavorable nor favorable
–Somewhat favorable
–Very favorable impression of the news media and news organizations

In general, how satisfied are you with the news coverage you are currently getting about President-Elect Donald Trump?

Not at all satisfied
–Not very satisfied
–Somewhat satisfied
–Very satisfied
–Extremely satisfied

Um, not at all satisfied seemed appropriate.

Here are some weird choices—many of which lean toward a favorable review of the media. I was supposed to pick the ones I agreed with.

–There are not enough positive/uplifting stories in the news
–Most news stories are generally accurate
— Most news stories get the facts straight
— In presenting news about social issues, most news deals fairly with all sides
— I’m taking a break from news for awhile
— It is easy for me to tell the difference between hard news and opinion
— I’m seeking more “soft news” these days
— I find sensational news headlines irresistible
— In presenting news about political issues, most news deals fairly with all sides
— News is no longer relevant to me
— I think the freedom of the press is part of a healthy democracy
–Most news is generally trustworthy
— These days it seems like news cannot be objectively reported
–All news is pretty much the same regardless of where you get it
–Most news is reported without bias

I really needed a selection here for “other.”

Here is an example of confirmation bias: Now thinking about news organizations in general, which of the following applies?

–Practice high journalistic standards [Seriously?].
–Objectively report the news [You betcha].
–Provide a service to the public [C’mon!]
–Has reporters with strong expertise in the topics they cover [Paul Krugman and Charles Blow?]
–Are trustworthy [About the same as car salesmen, with no offense meant to auto dealerships].
–Lie or mislead [Finally, I can agree with something!]

Here was one in my wheelhouse: Now, thinking about The New York Times, which of the following applies?

Practice high journalistic standards [Nope].
–Objectively report the news [Nope]
–Provide a service to the public [Ditto]
–Has reporters with strong expertise in the topics they cover [Are you kidding?]
–Are trustworthy [Sorry, car salesmen].
–Lie or mislead [YES, YES and YES!]

Which, if any, of the following applies to The New York Times? I dispatched the complimentary ones and chose the following:

–Does not deal fairly with all sides on political issues
–Arrogant
–Too focused on New York
–Makes it difficult for me to tell the difference between hard news and opinion
–It’s politically biased
–Does not get the facts straight
–Unreliable; I don’t trust their reporting
–Too liberal
–Does not deal fairly with all sides on social issues

I will allow that I was a bit disingenuous on some questions. I said I voted for Hillary Clinton. I wanted to see what happened. Later, I was asked again if I really voted for her.

I said I was a moderate who supported equal rights for everyone. I was tempted to choose one of the many religious options, including Shinto, Muslim, Taoist, Hindu or Buddhist. I settled for Christian since Catholic was not an option.

I accurately described myself as an educator who lived in a large metropolitan area and had a good income. Alas, deplorable was not an option here.

I doubt that my answers will affect the way The Times operates, but it sure was fun to take the survey. In fact, it’s the most fun I’ve had since the day after the election!

Here is a podcast about this column:

http://datechguyblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/harperdatechguypodcast.mp3


Christopher Harper teaches media law.

I want to bring to your attention 4 stories that all add up to one thing concerning the left’s Trump Derangement Syndrome.

Item: The Return of Democrat Astroturf:

Headline: Obama PACs Bus Protesters To GOP Town Halls

Political action committees that fundraised for President Barrack Obama during the 2012 presidential election, bused protesters to Republican town hall events nationwide earlier in February, according to a Sunday report from The Washington Post.

Democrats nationwide continue to search for ways to oppose President Donald Trump after the 2016 election, and they are digging deep into funding from years ago. An unnamed pro-Obama super PAC organized protests at several town halls, going so far as busing protesters outside the member’s districts.

Because nothings says “grassroots anger” like political PACS sending people to meetings to generate anger.

Item:  The Shadow President

Headline: How Obama is scheming to sabotage Trump’s presidency

In what’s shaping up to be a highly unusual post-presidency, Obama isn’t just staying behind in Washington. He’s working behind the scenes to set up what will effectively be a shadow government to not only protect his threatened legacy, but to sabotage the incoming administration and its popular “America First” agenda.

He’s doing it through a network of leftist nonprofits led by Organizing for Action. Normally you’d expect an organization set up to support a politician and his agenda to close up shop after that candidate leaves office, but not Obama’s OFA. Rather, it’s gearing up for battle, with a growing war chest and more than 250 offices across the country.

If Trump is supposed to be the Dictator how come Obama is scheming to keep power?

Item: The Things that Worry Rich Liberals

Headline: Trump ties to Upper East Side school stirs moms

Upper East Side moms are having a spirited online debate over whether to boycott a school where a grandchild of President Trump is a student.

One of the anonymous contributors to UrbanBaby.com said her son had gotten into Buckley [School], but she didn’t want to send him there because a son of Donald Trump Jr.’s (likely 4-year-old Spencer Frederick) is said to be going to kindergarten there in the fall.

“They will be in the same classroom and I don’t think I can deal with this. Birthday parties, etc.,”…A third mother wrote: “You almost have to decline. It sounds like it will drive you crazy . . . You want to spend nine years worried that DS [darling son] is getting infected with Trumpism?”

I’ll let Doctor Stephanie Barnett handle this one

These people never left high schools intellectually did they/

Item: Chanting: We are the .011%!

Headline Hundreds gather in Washington Square Park to rally against Trump’s policies

Manhattan — Hundreds gathered in Washington Square Park to criticize Mayor de Blasio and city council members for their continued support for broken windows policing.

Rally organizers of this Immigrant-led coalition claimed that while the Trump administration steps up their war on immigrants, the city has yet to take any concrete action to live up to the city’s sanctuary status.

“We are calling on New York City to be a real sanctuary city,” Karina Garcia, a rally organizer, told PIX11 News. “We want a sanctuary city for all immigrants and people of color. No more arrests under broken windows policing.”

A reminder, New York has a population estimated at 8.5 million and they drew HUNDREDS!

What do these stories have in common, they show that loudest opposition to Donald Trump is basically fake news.

Think about it, Donald Trump is so unpopular that in order to draw people opposed to his policies to town halls it’s necessary to have Super Pacs buss them in and have the ex president of the United States political machine help coordinate attacks.

Furthermore in NYC where Donald Trump managed only 18% of the vote (2,229,537 to 494,548) The 2,229,537 are so outraged that a whole .044% of them showed up to rally against him in the largest city in the United States (and that doesn’t take into account all the surrounding cities they could have drawn protests from .

But more importantly it’s story #3. The private school story that tells the tale. The real opposition to Trump, the opposition that’s getting press is, in my opinion from rich white liberals who, unlike folks who have been living paycheck to paycheck or have seen their real wages drop, have reached a point in their lives where the only real difficulties in life are the ones in their own minds.

Put Simply to steal a phrase from the great Evan Sayet who has them pegged, it’s a revolt from the Kindergarden of Eden and if we had an honest media it would be treated as such.

Which is why it is not

2016 Fabulous 50 Blog AwardsThe CPAC bleg was a success but the regular monthly bills keep coming and I’m still going to need a car this year to replace mine that has reached the drinking age in every state in the US

So If you’d like to help support our award winning independent non MSM journalism and opinion from writers all over the nation like Baldilocks, RH, Fausta, JD Rucker Christopher Harper, Pat Austin, and John Ruberry plus Monthly pieces from Jon Fournier, Tech Knight and Ellen Kolb not to mention Zilla of the Resistance and want to help pay their monthly wages please consider hitting DaTipJar.




Olimometer 2.52

Please consider Subscribing. You can be listed as a Friend of DaTechguy blog for as little as $2 a week. If only 130 of the 209K+ unique visitors who came in 2016 .07% subscribed at the same levels as our current subscription base we would make our current annual goal with ease. If we could boost that number to 260 I could afford to go to CPAC and cover major events in person all over the country and maybe take some of Da Magnificent Seven writers with me.

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


Choose a Subscription level



In case you are wondering, while the CPAC bleg tip jar hits are claimed on my taxes they are not claimed on the annual goal because they were a special expense directly solicited for the most part from previous tip jar hitters. If you are a subscriber and wonder why do didn’t get the email, I figure you’re already paying the bills here so I figure I had no business bugging you for more. If you did get such a solicitation that’s because you were not taken off the old tipjar only list (that would be my oversight)