Media vs. McCain: Love Affair Ends as Media Finds Replacement Obama

Whenever you tell liberals that there is a media bias, they usually deny it and then turn to old faithful, "what about Fox News?"  Well, if that's the only example you can come up with, then that sort of proves the point.  Then there is part 2, "what about talk radio?"  Of course, talk radio is dominated by conservative pundits, but do you ever wonder why?  The majority of listeners are people listening at work, and it's hard to be a liberal when you see all of your hard earned tax dollars sifted away paycheck after paycheck on government programs that don't work, only to be used on "new" terribly designed programs to fix the old inefficient programs that the government instituted in the first place.  In any case, ceding Fox News and talk radio, let's take a look at media in the tank for liberals:

Newspapers:  NY Times, LA Times, and the list goes on and on, including most major foreign sources
Major Networks: CNN, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, BBC
Hollywood
Academia, though it's not traditional media, it is published wide and far throughout every university.  For those who make the claim the universities are not liberal, I wonder how far left they are to think that leftist professors are rightist.

What you see is a complete domination of most sources of media, excluding radio of course.  Oh, and liberals do have plans for talk radio!  The "Fairness Doctrine" will even out liberals' complete inability to compete in a free market system against their conservative/libertarian rivals.  Of course, this will all be legislated.  It is way too important for liberals to quash dissent to leave it up to the free market.  Curiously, the doctrine won't touch their traditional allies.

The recent DNC coverage was a prime example of just how in the tank the liberal networks are, having difficulties to not gush and fawn over the Messiah.  When Bill Maher has to point out how embarrassing MSNBC's coverage was, then you know how liberally biased news has become:


Now, the media, who used to be fond of the Maverick, John McCain, have turned on him.  The media won't look into Obama's past relations with William Ayers, Tony Rezko, Reverend Wright, and countless others or Joe Biden's lobbyist connections (including his own son being rewarded by Obama with $3.4 million in earmarks).  Also the media took years to swing into action on the John Edwards' scandal with their unbiased coveraged.  But give Sarah Palin two days as a Vice Presidential candidate on the Republican ticket and the smears were on.  First, they attacked her experience, forgetting how absurd their position was, because Palin and Obama are at worst equally experienced or inexperienced.  Palin has at least run something.  Obama has, well, shady past associates, but, res assured, he never really knew them.  Next, the media goes after Palin's daughter, which Bill Bennett and others have called them on:

The worst thing about these attacks is it came from a media who supposedly cares more about the privacy of women than "evil" conservatives.  And you wonder why John McCain is fed up with the media? 

The point is that while John McCain was a thorn in Republicans' side as the Maverick, the media loved him.  When he started running up against the liberal Messiah, the One from Hope and Change, Illinois, the game changed, and the media turned on him.  The betrayal of John McCain has forced the liberal media to show their cards, and they are brazenly doing so.

Check us out: thejtandbearshow.com/Audio.html

Check out the latest show:

The JT and Bear Show 08.24.08

Check out Obamalujah on Youtube:

Obamalujah

Email us: jtandbear@thejtandbearshow.com

Check out our myspace: http://www.myspace.com/jtandbearshow

Join our facebook group: http://www.facebook.com/groups.php?ref=sb#/group.php?gid=15305890845

Video: Bill Bennett Revolts Against CNN's Coverage of Palin's Daughter

In this video, Bill Bennett goes after CNN, and rightfully so.  There is a time for discussion about birth control, abstinence, and the appropriate context for teaching either method in our schools.  That debate is a worthy one, but bashing Sarah Palin and her daughter for apparent hypocrisy because Palin supports abstinence is unquestionably unworthy.  In fact, it is quite disgusting to attack a philosophical approach to a problem by using someone's private matters.  Kudos to Bill Bennett.  Here's the video:



As one can tell, liberals are confused about what to do.  Should they attack Palin at the expense of their own "principles" of privacy or go all out to win this election?  Their situation is laughable, because it highlights the hypocrisy of identity politics and why it's such a risk to play that game.  First, there was the treatment of Geraldine Ferraro, then Hillary Clinton, and now Sarah Palin.  Think women won't notice?

This a parody of Obama that JT and I put together.  I rewrote the words and performed the song.  Hope you enjoy:

Check us out:  The JT and Bear Show

Check out our quickly growing blog:  blog1.thejtandbearshow.com

Babygate: the Left Forces Palin's Daughter to Reveal Pregnancy

The Left is not called looney without ample reason.  Recently leftist bloggers tried to claim that Sarah Palin's recent pregnancy was faked to cover up for her daughter's pregnancy.  That would have meant that the down syndrome baby, Trig, was her daughter's and not Sarah Palin's.  Oh, how the left would have jumped with glee had that been true, just like Democrats were happy when it found out hurricane Gustav was bearing down on the US at the time of the Republican National Convention.  Isn't it disgusting how the left makes political use of disastrous situations?  They will stop at nothing to win an election.  In any case, as Townhall points out in response to the picture exposing the alleged lie:

Now, because the left is pressing the issue, Palin, to rebut the rumors, had to reveal to the world that her daughter, Bristol, 17 years old, is pregnant.  As Palin herself stated:

First of all, compare that statement to Barack's statements about his daughters being punished with a child at such an age:

Will the Messiah come out and say that Palin is punishing her daughter with a baby, the point being that the daughter should have an abortion instead?  I wouldn't put it past him.  The difference in philosophical approaches to birth is glaring.  One side believes having a baby at any age is a blessing, even if it will be difficult to raise it.  The other side sees birth as a burden and punishment, preferring to abort the "burden."  Even if the so-called burden survives the abortion, Obama, based on his record in Illinois is okay with infanticide.  All because it would burden the original choice to kill the baby. 

The other issue here is privacy.  Will the Left, so staunch in its assertions of privacy when it comes to a woman's choice, respect the privacy of Bristol Palin?  Highly unlikely.  It is always a double standard when it comes to this happening to a conservative.  Case in point, the affair of John Edwards.  It only took the media years to swing into action on that story.  The media will write in this case, "ha, conservative hypocrits!  Her own daughter got pregnant at 17.  How conservative is that?"  You see, the Left fails to realize that just because you have moral standards doesn't mean you will always live up to them.  This stems from the belief that humans are deeply flawed and will err.  That does not mean you don't promote good moral standards at all.  For the Left it is better to not have such burdensome standards.

Lastly, the Left would be without its Messiah, the One from Hope and Change, Illinois, had Obama's mother not decided to give birth to him at the age of 17.  Where would the world be if she had decided Obama was "punishment?"  This won't stop criticism from the Left, blind in its pursuit for the White House and hatred for George Bush.  Hypocrisy is no impediment for the Left.