Posted on 08/28/2016 6:56:22 AM PDT by Kaslin
Before the Internet when I wanted to keep track of a story, I had to clip articles and file them, often establishing over the years how much in error the press accounts had been. Now, a few clicks and there we have what we had remembered but not saved. It will come as no surprise to regular readers of the Washington Post to learn that one of their oped writers Ruth Marcus is easily exposed as a partisan spinner in a quick check of a comparison of her treatment of Hillary Clinton and former Virginia Governor Bob McDonnell.
This week, Marcus wrote an editorial critical of Donald Trump’s “unhinged calls” for a special prosecutor to look into the Clinton Foundation. She dismissed the claims that the Foundation was a “pay to play” operation.
Actually, the facts so far don't come close to special prosecutor territory. The "favors done" -- the supposed quo for the Clinton Foundation quid -- appear pretty meager.
The most critical remark she can manage is to suggest that since Hillary is beset by “enemies” who apply a stricter standard to her, she should have been more careful.
Why, oh why, since the Clintons know their activities will be subjected to microscopic scrutiny -- since, as Clinton partisans claim, with some justification, she is pilloried for conduct for which others receive a pass -- do they continue to operate in a manner that opens them to attack by their enemies?
Specifically, why -- given that the notion of another run for the presidency wasn't exactly off the table -- did Clinton (and the staff that was supposed to be looking after her interests) not erect an impenetrable wall between foundation and State?
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
The issue isn't that they're worthless as news organizations or that they're lending their resources to liberals. That hasn't been news for half a century! The issue is, what can we do to drive a stake into this corrupt, filthy estate and eliminate them as change agents for the "progressive" Gestapo?
We need to keep pounding it home BECAUSE it’s NOT old hat to independents or right leaning Democrats. They need to know what we know...
Face it, guys. We're NEVER going to convince the media to be objective. And anyone who actually gathers their "news" from those groups KNOWS they're being lied to, misled, and treated like Nielsen numbers instead of inquiring human beings. But the "news" they see and hear confirms all their biases and validates their whore philosophy, so they ignore the realities and continue to subscribe. We're not going to change that.
We need to humiliate them, disempower them, and ultimately drive them out of business. Their time is past.
It's not enough to KNOW them; to win, we have to destroy them.
If you'd like to be on or off the Clarice Feldman ping list, drop me a FReepmail.
https://www.rt.com/usa/340124-americans-trust-media-plummets
From link:
"A survey of more than 2,000 adults released on Sunday showed that trust in the media has dipped to dramatically low levels. About 52 percent of respondents said they have “some confidence” in the press, while 41 percent said they have “hardly any confidence.”
That people lack confidence in them is good, but they still spew their lies every hour of every day. If 59 percent of the people in this country still believe the media have ANY credibility, we're facing an uphill battle. We need to intensify our efforts to expose these treasonous, lying sacks of puke for what they are.
Ruth Marcus is an extension of Hillary’s colon...
It's not enough to KNOW them; to win, we have to destroy them.
And that's one big reason we want to see Trump humiliate them 8th November. But articles like Clarice Feldman's help, they help a lot. Do not for a moment think that Ruth Marcus and others of similar ilk a not upset and worried about being outed as pure hypocrites. That's also why the kind of plain speaking we hear from Donald Trump, Rudy Giuliani and others are met with such vehement animosity. The MSM idiots know that this time their ideological monopoly is on the verge of being broken - just as happened during the 1980s.
Any military expert will tell you that if you fight the enemy with yesterday's Intel you will lose.
Yes, top editors take their cues from the New York Times then do 'a local slant' but those leads from the New York Times and Washington Post are generated in Democrat War Rooms fueled by opposition research pros.
We can play off the book, "What's the Matter With Kansas" - "the great political mystery of our day: Why do so many Americans vote against their economic and social interests?" (https://www.amazon.com/Whats-Matter-Kansas-Conservatives-America/dp/080507774X)
Then ask - 'why do so many journalists write against their own economic and social interest'? Why would a 'news' person inject bias into their writing? Why NOT leave that to opinion writers? Why not BE professional... especially when 'jobs for journalists' are on the line?
1) Journalism schools teach that it is impossible for a writer to avoid injecting biases into his observations. Therefore, why try? It's okay to be a bigot; you can't help yourself. Just make sure you're a LIBERAL bigot or we'll fire your a$$ faster than you can type "The quick brown fox jumped over the lazy dog."
2) Even if a reporter tried to be objective, his editors would either insist that he rewrite the story to be more slanted, or they would take it on themselves to inject the bias. Or they would simply spike the story and yell at the reporter for not producing.
3) Reporters don't go into journalism to report the news. They go into those careers because they're too stupid to get real jobs, and because journalism is (formerly) a safe haven for left-wing social engineers and "activists" who "want to make a difference." They're advocates, not observers.
You will NEVER convince today's crop of imitation journalists that their job is to report news objectively. They can't be changed; they must be destroyed.
Sure, it will eventually mean not only the end of their jobs, but the demise of the entire Fourth Estate. But remember, these are not very bright people, and worse, they're crusaders who think that their sacrifice is worth it if it's for "the Cause."
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.