The Media Cover-up (For Now)

If the media is one thing---it is transparent. It is also leftist and predictable, but that would be three things.

So, here we go with a prediction born of the leftist transparency we find with the Activist Old Media. 

Sometime after November 7th the media will begin doing its job. Now...it still won't fully do it's job, but it will at least give it the ol' College Journalism School Try. 

Two scandals should be rocking this White House right now. By themselves, each is worse than Watergate, and combined they would make Barack Obama the most scandalous president in history. Fast and Furious, the Benghazi terrorist attack; and lies and cover-ups with both.

There is an election to win right now for the media and its Dear Leader, so neither scandal will get the attention it deserves. We know that, we see that. Oh...they may touch on these stories and bite around the edges, but the junk yard dogs sit muzzled and chained while the Obama administration has its way with the merchandise (in this case, we would be the merchandise.) Never forget this is the same media that spent four years, four years attacking the George W. Bush White House over the supposed leaking of a non-covert CIA agent's name. A story the media got horribly wrong, but oh well, the Bushies had it comin'.

Whether Obama wins or loses this election, the media will suddenly learn of these two stories through osmosis (or they will click into Big Government and read them) and they will cover them as if they knew them all along. They will try to maintain a smidgen of credibility. Investigative reporters will be unleashed, books will be written, and Peabody's and Emmy's will be awarded en-mass.

If Obama loses November 6th, the media will have ignored its motto of "speaking truth to power" because Obama will be out of power. It does little good then. The time to do these stories is now. Right now. But clearly the media feel loose seats on an American Airlines jet where nobody was hurt is more important. Gotta protect our viewers from bumping their heads---but 4 dead in Benghazi and 300+ killed in Fast and Furious will have to wait (oh, plus the lies and cover-ups, remember with Watergate it was the lies and cover-ups that were worse.) There was no desire by the media to tell the voting public who Obama was in 2008, why would they suddenly do it in 2012? They will not, they have not. 

If Obama wins November 6th (heaven help us---no really, heaven help us) the media will do what it has done to the second-terms of the most recent presidents in memory. The media will exert its power and make surethat president knows that they are in charge.  Never forget, as much as they love Obama, they love themselves and their power more. 

Second-term scandals, real or perceived are the reality. Nixon-Watergate, Reagan-Iran Contra, Clinton-Monica, Bush-Just being alive. Historians have argued that presidents get cocky in their second terms and that leads to their demise, and part of that is true, but the Obama scandals have been uncovered in his firstterm. I shutter to think what scandals might become us if he gets four more years. I haven't even mentioned the scandals of where the "stimulus" dollars were spent.

The Activist Old Media will do these stories and they will want credit for doing them. They will tell themselves how tough they were on Obama and they will point to the awards on their shelves as proof. Of course, we know the truth. When these stories needed to be done the junk yard dogs sat silent, by choice. 

There are still a few weeks left to do these stories when they matter most, but the media will not do them. They would've by now. The facts are out there now and it will matter little when they report them later.   

They have muzzled and chained themselves. 

Follow Ron Futrell on Twitter @RonFutrell

What The Left Hates Most About Clint Eastwood

His appearance has been widely panned by the left and its Activist Old Media. Clint Eastwood dared jump off the leftist bandwagon in Hollywood and he joined the Evil Right. 

But it gets deeper than that. 

They hate his "bit" on stage at the Republican National Convention because he ridiculed the president. He dared make fun of their Dear Leader. 

You don't do that and expect to leave unscathed. 

The Empty Chair performance by "Dirty Harry" bothered the President to the point that he had to tweet his own response (or his staff did it for him, who knows?) by saying, "This seat's taken."

Oh, you could argue that all of this is being done in good fun, but the Romney's are being asked serious questions by the media about what they think of Eastwood's performance. They have been rock solid behind Eastwood by saying they appreciate his support. Damn! The media had hoped the Romney's would've thrown Clint under their campaign bus. To their credit, they didn't. 

Meanwhile, it's important to note that this administration does not like to be ridiculed. No stateist can allow that. Leftists take themselves very seriously. Obama may occasionally laugh and joke about himself, but deep down he is a Cold Hearted Social Engineer and they are not the type who take to ridicule kindly. 

What they hate most is Eastwood opened the door for more ridicule. Before you make the contention that this "embarrassed the Office of the President," gimme a break. Obama started that when he removed the Churchill Bust. Besides, anybody out there remember what the left and its Activist Old Media did to George W. Bush? Our memories are not that bad. 

Deep down Eastwood's performance did not make Obama's day, it ruined it. 

Scott Walker vs. MSNBC, Classic Mismatch

I don't think MSNBC will mess with Scott Walker again anytime soon.

They went at him, one at a time like in a Jackie Chan movie. Wack, pow, wack, smack!

First reporter Ron Mott was live with Walker on the convention floor. All fine there. Good questions, tough questions. Respectful. 

Then Rachel Maddow jumped in and took her shots at the Wisconsin Governor (while Mott held the mic for the crew back in the studio.) Her misguided shots were over a statement Paul Ryan made during his speech about the closing of a Janesville, Wisconsin GM plant.  

Ryan said (correctly) that Obama had promised during a visit (Feb 2008) that government would help keep the plant open. The announcement of the plant closing came while Bush was in the White House, then it eventually closed for good while Obama was president. Them's the facts---but Ryan's main point was that Obama promised that government would keep the plant open and government did not fulfill its promise. Obama could've kept the plant open and he should be asked why it's closed, but MSNBC would never go there.

MSNBC had gotten some super-secret information (from their super-duper fact checking crew at Wa Po) about when the plant closed and they were ready to pounce. 

Apparently the MSNBC crew back in the studio didn't really understand what Ryan said, they didn't care what Ryan said, or they didn't know the actual date the plant closed. That would be January 13, 2010. Hmmmmm. Not sure who was in the White House then. I'll have Wa Po check that for me. (For the record, the plant is in "stand by" status right now.) Cars were still being produced at the plant through June 2009.

MSNBC should learn how to search Wikipedia. Here are the entries and dates.

In October 2008, GM announced Janesville Assembly would be largely idled December 23, 2008 when production of SUVs would end.^[10] A skeleton crew continued to work at Janesville Assembly through June, 2009, completing the Janesville/Isuzu light truck contract.

[edit]2010

On January 13, 2010 GM put Janesville Assembly on stand-by to produce new vehicles due to recent increase in demand for GM vehicles.^{[citation needed]}

Well, Maddow attacked. She incorrectly said the plant closed during the Bush administration. Walker responded calmly and told her there were "two rounds of layoffs," as Wikipedia points out. Wack!

Rachel backed up and changed the issue to the auto bailout. Walker again responded with class and a deft jab and told her the bailout did not work for Wisconsin and pointed out the closing of the Janesville plant. Pow! One down. That was easy---just gettin' warmed up here.

Then Heavyweight Big Eddie (Schultz, who has been MSNBC's main attack dog on Walker---Eddie flips out whenever he talks about Walker) had his turn. Eddie's face got red, his fists were clinched, his voice was raised as he quoted the Washington Post (big mistake, should've used Wikipedia) on the first "closing." Walker calmly reminded Eddie of what he had said to Rachel that a "managed bankruptcy" would've been best for GM. Poor MSNBC crew, they apparently don't know what a managed bankruptcy is. They never responded to that. All they know is government takeover. 

Then Eddie tried one of his favorite tricks, he asked a stupid question, then gave his own stupid answer while not allowing Walker to respond. When Walker was finally allowed to talk, he reminded Eddie of the point Ryan made that Obama promised the workers that government would keep the plant open. Promise not kept.

Wack! Lights out! Peter McNeely lasted longer against Mike Tyson. I was at that fight. It was a first round disqualification. McNeely, like Eddie, rushed out to the center of the ring to attack his opponent at the first sound of the bell. It wasn't pretty. DQ.

Oh, it gets better.   

Reverend Al Sharpton jumped in and trusted the Wa Po date and took his swings at Walker and wiffed badly. I felt the wind here in Vegas. Tawana Brawley would've given Walker a better fight. Pow! Down goes Sharpton!

Three first round knockouts for Walker. 

They do not want a rematch. 

Follow Ron Futrell on Twitter @RonFutrell

British Media, Doing The Job The US Media Refuse to Do

It's been known for years that the US media has decided not to do its job when it comes to vetting Barack Obama, but when the British media is out there reporting critically on this White House on a daily basis, the contrast is startling.

If the Activist Old Media in this country had the ability to be embarrassed, they would cower in the corner over the way the British media pounds them on Obama coverage.

The America media chooses not to report these stories, it's not that they are getting "beaten" on them. Of course, that fact makes this much worse.

Dr. Tim Stanely of the UK Telegraph reports this week on the issue of President Obama's latest revelations of his "composite" girlfriend and the stories of him eating dog in Indonesia. In the last paragraph of his column Dr. Stanley says these issues should've been brought out long ago, since Obama wrote them in his book.


"That we are only discussing them this late into Obama’s career suggests that the vetting that should have happened four years ago was unforgivably neglected. But, hey, it’s never too late to start."


We'll see about the media and when/if it actually decides to start vetting this president. I have heard from many of my media friends that the vetting of Obama was already done, so it is not needed now. Of course, he was not vetted during the last election because the media did not want to vet him for fear of what they might find out, and besides, all their crews were in Alaska looking under rocks, glaciers, and inside igloos for Sarah Palin dirt. 

Another big story this week, reported by the British and ignored by the US media involves Navy SEALs voicing their disgust over Obama "spiking the football" on the killing of Osama bin Laden. Perhaps you heard, this week was the One Year Anniversary of the New National Holiday Honoring Obama For Shooting and Killing bin Laden. It's been in the news. This story about the Navy SEALs was not in the news, at least not here in the US. This story was in the UK Daily Mail Online. Perhaps the US media has forgotten that there is an internet and we can get these stories from the British media just as easily as we can get theirs. Click.


Of course, the US media is trying to control what we know and when we know it. They had been planning this Obama Celebration of The Killing of bin Laden, National Day of Honoring Dear Leader for weeks and they didn't want anybody ruining this party. Certainly not some British "rag." 


This was the president that the world was going to love and people across the planet were going to worship him as do the leftists in this nation. With the US media willingly in lock-step with the regime, the international media certainly would follow and the entire planet would bask in the glow of a Supreme Leader that would save us all from whatever we need to be saved from during the next 24 Second News Cycle. Seems the British media didn't get the memo. 


UPDATE May 3 11:00pm Pacific


The UK Guardian does a prominent story analyzing Osama bin Laden's thoughts on the US media. Seems bin Laden didn't like Fox News, but felt his terrorist group could make inroads with much of the other US media, like CBS and MSNBC. Again, a story from the British media that US media does not want to touch because....well, because it probably hits too close to home for them. 

NBC Nightly News Ignores Cleveland Terrorists OWS Background

The Occupy Wall Street terrorists who plotted to blow up a Cleveland bridge and kill dozens of innocent people, should use NBC's Brian Williams as their lead  defense witness.

First, the Peacock Network totally ignored the background of the OWS terrorists. It did not mention one word of who these people were, how they are leftist terrorists, how they planned to also blow up banks, the Republican National Convention, and other American sites.  These OWS terrorists are products of the class warfare being perpetuated by Barack Obama, the Democrat Party and the Activist Old Media.

NBC spent the first 10 minutes of Nightly News reporting on the First Anniversary of the Killing of Osama binLaden by Barack Obama, and then snuck in 24 seconds on the OWS terrorists.

Here's the entire script as read by Williams:


The FBI arrested five self-described anarchists in Cleveland, Ohio today, the men are between 20 and 37 years of age. They're accused of plotting to blow up a bridge over a park in Cleveland. The plot was uncovered by an FBI sting operation that provided them with what they thought to be bomb material. As is the case with so many of these similar situations, the FBI said in the end there was never any real danger associated with the plan.

Call Brian Williams to the witness stand. He's making the case for these guys.

There was no video shown of cars going over the bridge, NBC made it look abandoned. Actually, 13,000 people a day travel over that bridge and the OWS terrorists pulled the trigger on what they thought were plastic explosives that would've destroyed the bridge and killed occupants during rush-hour, but, "there was never any real danger associated with the plan." Ya, because the FBI were tipped off to the terrorist attack and gave the guys dummy explosives. Were it not for that, NBC's beloved Dear Leader would've been bumped to the second slot on this "historic day" and dozens of Americans would've become innocent victims of the Occupy Wall Street movement, beloved by the left and supported by countless Democrat politicians.

The background of the OWS terrorists was well known by the time NBC went on air, in fact, Tuesday night they even did a special West Coast Edition of Nightly News so they had extra time to research this. They knew these terrorists were OWS and chose not to report that very relevant fact. Who these people are and what motivates them does matter. Looks like some more selective editing by NBC. Are we sure they fired the person who edited that George Zimmerman audio tape?

Foolish Question of The Week

"Can Romney get on the cover of the Rolling Stone?"

This question was asked by none other than the brilliant Chris Matthews to his panel of fellow leftists on his syndicated Sunday show.

The show began with Matthews calling President Barack Obama a "rock star," and presumptive Republican nominee Mitt Romney a "square." Bingo. There's that template that is tireless in trying to help the left get votes for their Dear Leader. Later in the show the question was asked why "polls say" Obama will supposedly get the youth vote. I dunno, maybe it has something to do with the media mantra?

Chris set the question up by talking about what a "rock star" John F. Kennedy was and how Barack Obama is the new rock star president. We've heard this theme from him before. I think Chris has a very real struggle over who to worship more, Kennedy or Obama? Earlier in the show Matthews asked his favorite question, the one he has already asked at least a hundred times during this campaign; "who is the most likable candidate?"

Seriously, I think Chris has a problem and needs some psychoanalysis. I'll try a little of it here.

Chris, just because you have to feel a thrill up your leg for a politician, doesn't mean we all do. You seem to have this bizarre obsession with American's having to fall in love with politicians and follow them with some sort of fawning worship. At one level it's silly, and at another level it's dangerous. Germany loved Hitler. He was their rock star. Every maniacal totalitarian leader first needs the public to be blinded by their "greatness" before he can turn them to serfs.

Or, I can put it this way; if my wife or one of my kids ran for office, I could love that politician, but short of that.....

Chris, you should really get this obsession with "loving" politicians checked out. This is not normal.

I don't need a presidential candidate on the cover of Rolling Stone, I want Jimmy Page on the cover of Rolling Stone. I want my president to get out there, do a great job protecting the Constitution and staying out of my life. That's about it. Obama has not done that, I believe Mitt Romney will. I want Rolling Stone to tell me how Led Zeppelin recorded "When The Levee Breaks" in an old British castle in the countryside.

Matthews' panelist Liz Marlantes from the Christian Science Monitor responded to the question of whether Romney could get on the cover of Rolling Stone with this; "I don't think so, well, we'll see, who knows?" I think she was a little shocked by the foolish question.

I will say this to Chris, I don't know if Romney will get on the cover of Rolling Stone, but I do know that if he does, the article inside will be packed with lies. That's part of the template as well.