Replies

"You speak of 'bias' and 'censorship' and 'blackout' of coverage of the annual 'March for Life.' I am afraid, however, that the real reason for the lack of coverage lies in another word: newsworthiness. The mere bringing together of 100,000 people does not make the event newsworthy.

Great post, we march and we shake our heads at the lack of coverage.

This man is a fool who couldn't find his ass with both hands and a clue. If he would bother to look at the March for Life he woud be astounded and who populates it. Tens of thousands of teenagers Rockin for Life. It is one of the most uplifting things I have experienced seeing all those kids committed to a cause that is righteous.

Exactly so! Furthermore, the whole point of bringing up liberal bias in the media is not to change the media's closed minds - that's all but impossible - but rather to further discredit the media in the eyes of the public. The goal is to make the media a running joke among one in all - just like Stalin's media was. In this way, the media will lose much of it power to push its godless leftwing, pro-abortion, pro-homo agenda, big government agenda.

Yet such an event doesn't seem to interest the media....

During impeachment, Reed Irvine of AIM made a statement so simple and yet so profound that it bears repeating:

"If the press doesn't like a story,
they just won't talk about it."

I must confess that I have not read Bernard Goldberg's book, Bias - the so-called expose on the American media; but I am glad that such a "tome" has been written, especially by the proverbial insider, however liberal he might be.

Matt needs to read the book. It was excellent. Dan Blather, Jennings and all the other mediots are so decidedly biased it's pathetic.

Finding bias is easy - look for the adjectives. If I wrote "a friend of mine" I mean someone like me, but "a black/gay/female/hispanic/etc friend of mine" illustrates that I'm obviously pointing out the differences. Same with the media - congresscritters they agree with are simply Senator xxx, and their legislation is simply legislation. Look for the differneces - they are conservative/right-wing Senator xxx, and their legislation is risky/scheming/wacky legislation.

Be Aware of Arlene Sawicki

It seems Arlene Sawicki has a vedetta against pro-life organizations in Illinois.

Arlene Sawicki is spreading the following lies masked as news in e-mail messages to pro-lifers in Illinois.

She started:

"Rumor has it that it is the IFRL Board which is considering the endorsement of Judy Baar Topinka as the "lesser of two evils!" How does that grab you?"

She continued with...

"Eunice Conn says the ICL is also endorsing Topinka...they are trying to paint her as a somewhat pro-life candidate ! What?"

Arlene ends her message with this statement:

"I am hoping that if the Board of the IFRL is asked who they endorse for Governor, their answer will be.... NOT TOPINKA OR BLAGOJEVICH!"
-Arlene

I checked with the IFRL and they have not yet released their endorsements and after checking with ICL, I found that they are NOT endorsing any candidate for Governor in this election.

It seems to me that Arlene has dedicated herself to destroying the reputation of pro-life organziations in Illinois by spreading false rumors about them. She first attacks the IFRL and then the ICL. You may want to think twice on issues that Arlene reports on.