Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
Login | What's Hot
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons

Comment on: Not So Friendly Fire

The Power of the Press

69 Comments
Sunday, June, 21, 2009 11:32 AM BrianR writes:

Wow!

I agreed with every single word you wrote! Outstanding!

I may be down to having to nitpick grammar to find something to quibble with.

The TV news has become even more disgustigly butt-licking lately, with the "Inside the White House" so-called "specials" that were broadcast (which I didn't watch, but were advertised so heavily I couldn't help being aware of them. I'd rather eat raw guano than watch that crap).

The MSM has become nothing more than the house PR organ for Bat Ears, with Matthews or Williams or another of those toadies going so far as to compare the Commissar to God.

Simply amazing!
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Sunday, June, 21, 2009 12:37 PM Saltwater writes:

No Stone Left Unthrown

has become the traditional (they don't rate the title "Main Stream" in my book) media modus operandi.

One Governor I'm keeping an eye on is Mike Rounds of SD. I was surprised when he didn't run against Tim Johnson for Senator in 2008, a race he might have won. Not sure he is ready for prime time yet either, but he has demonstrated conservative credentials.

About Palin, I am also watching to see if she can gather herself after last year's flailex. She has done some things to make me wonder, but like Reagan, if you agree with me 70% of the time instead of 100%, I'll consider you an ally rather than an enemy.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Sunday, June, 21, 2009 3:40 PM clyde writes:

Sgt.Relic

And a power that,IMHO,has been horribly abused.We all know that they want to simply be able to say "we changed history" instead of doing their damned job,WHICH IS TO RECORD IT AS IT HAPPENED,NOT WHATEVER THE F&@K THEY THINK IT SHOULD BE. Got to agree with you,Sgt.,definitely time to bury the GOP of yesteryear.Maybe if we can bury it deep enough,the stench will go away.GREAT post.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Sunday, June, 21, 2009 4:40 PM Gar Swaffar writes:

How true

It is! There is a light at the end of the tunnel, and it's a freight train. Not a single truly conservative heavyweight to be found on the national Stage yet. I would hope for someone like Duncan Hunter to show up or with his type of credentials, but the enemymedia will never play those folks in a positive light.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Monday, June, 22, 2009 12:03 AM BrianR writes:

Exactly, Clyde


"we all know that they want to simply be able to say 'we changed history'..."


Exactly right. Ever since Watergate, they all want to be Woodward and Bernstein and "change history".

Either by bringing down their "opposition", or "defending" their Prince.


They don't even make any bones about it anymore.


EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Monday, June, 22, 2009 12:26 AM Tazzmax writes:

Great post Sarg.

Welcome to the new AmeriKa with it's own Pravda!

I wonder when they're gonna open the Gulags for us dissidents?

I've been reading the book, "Liberal Fascism", by Jonah Goldberg and it scares the hell out of me!

Progressive/fascist scumbags have been around in this country at least since Woodrow Wilson right up until today.

Marxists, fascists,and Nazis are all siblings in the same rotten family as the liberal/socialist/progressive demo-RATs.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Monday, June, 22, 2009 6:21 AM Sgt Relic writes:

Brian

If your gonna' grade my paper be sure and use purple ink otherwise you will destroy my self-esteem. HaHaHa!

Thanks for the kind words.

I have been noticing this trend lately. I've seen comments here at TH, and on other sites I regularly visit, which seem to suggest that the media has been successful to some degree in floating the idea that Gingrich is a serious candidate, and the voice of conservatives.

He gave that right up years ago. Zero and his minions may even be coordinating this effort. That little dust-up recently with Limbaugh gave the media a place to start a dialog about who leads the GOP.

That's the left's way of getting us to argue about it. Hey, it worked last time didn't it?

I don't like the MSM but there is no denying their power to influence public opinion.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Monday, June, 22, 2009 6:43 AM Sgt Relic writes:

Saltwater

The term mainstream is a misnomer used to set a feeling of exclusion in the minds of dissenters. I think Limbaugh gets this one right when he calls them the "dominate" media. That's probably more accurate.

I'm not familiar with Mike Rounds. In fact, I'm barely aware of SD, but I think it illustrates my point. The media could have made me aware of Rounds but probably chooses not unless they can report something bad about him.

Failex! Navy speak, I love it! HaHaHa!

I knew I'd get into to trouble on Palin. She may be just what is needed by the GOP to attract the younger voter but as we are seeing everyday with Zero, popularity doesn't necessarily translate to leadership ability.

What do we really know about her political philosophy?
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Monday, June, 22, 2009 6:53 AM Sgt Relic writes:

clyde

I agree. The media has been so co-opted that most news agencies are mere echo chambers for a single worldview.

Every year liberal minded students fill the J-schools. There might as well be a sign saying, "Conservatives Need Not Apply"!
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Monday, June, 22, 2009 7:05 AM Sgt Relic writes:

Gar (the blogger formerly known as boaz)

Exactly! The greatest crime the media commits is the crime of OMISSION. Fox News has had some success, probably inadvertently, forcing the networks to report on things they previously would have ignored.

Fox is seen as a conservative news agency but really, IMO, they are very middle of the road news source. Fox is not a counterweight.

My question has always been: Where is our billionaire and why hasn't he bought one of the alphabet channels?

We're supposed to be the party of the rich, right?
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Monday, June, 22, 2009 7:32 AM Sgt Relic writes:

Tazzmax

Goldberg makes a compelling argument in "Liberal Fascism" as he chronicles the "progressive movement".

TH blogger, Interface, wrote sometime back about the dialectical method. Two of the mainstays of this argument are that gradual changes lead to turning points, where one force overcomes the other and that change moves in spirals, not circles.

There is a goal and it is fixed. The Marxist moves toward the goal, and even when it appears they are moving away from the goal, they are still moving toward the goal.

The left is patient. Obama is the culmination of nearly 100 years of progressive action and although he appears to be the endgame even if he fails, they will simply spiral off and be back again in another 20 years.

It will take a much better educated public to defeat progressivism then exists in the United States today.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Tuesday, June, 23, 2009 9:24 AM Nee writes:

Sarge

My sugar daddy and I noticed the same in regards to the press.
That ABC is granting the WH, and the COWboy in chief complete access and he isn't paying for it, shows how much bias there really is and it IS sickening.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Tuesday, June, 23, 2009 9:50 AM Sgt Relic writes:

Nee

Seems to me that this is the same ABC that decided NOT to broadcast a Bush speech to the nation in '06 because it was May Sweeps Week.

With nothing on their schedule but Lost, and that in it's final season, I won't really miss ABC all that much.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Tuesday, June, 23, 2009 2:22 PM buck writes:

Discussed it with that other Jarhead

(Gunny G).

What needs to happen is those conservative Republicans you mentioned need to get together with the "Blue Dog" Democrats and start up a REAL conservative party. That would be kickachss.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Wednesday, June, 24, 2009 2:52 AM Sue writes:

Media

Why doesn't the media just say, we only care about democrats. I still don't get this entire thing. I really don't.

Even when the person that I voted for became President, I did not drool and have dreams about him. I did fawn over his dog or his neckties. I don't get this.

Tomorrow is the big ABC infomercial. How super. If they keep this up, I am running out of shows to watch.

And that Brian Wiliams thing, WTH was that supposed to be?
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Wednesday, June, 24, 2009 6:54 AM Sgt Relic writes:

buck

I'd like to hear Gunny's argument on that one. If I understand the term "blue dog" correctly they are democrats who claim to be fiscally conservative but are socially liberal.

It strikes me that that also describes RINO's.

I'm not sure we wouldn't be exchanging left of center republicans for left of center democrats. Status Quo.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Wednesday, June, 24, 2009 7:19 AM Sgt Relic writes:

Sue

You are sooo right! I'm having dreams about this guy but I think they're called nightmares!

There is no explaining Brian Williams. I guess it just shows you how far you can go in life with the right honorary doctorate.

ABC is just disgraceful! In fact, that can said of most of the media today. I don't know how that manage to read that stuff with a straight face. Oh! I've got it; liberals don't have a sense of humor, do they?

Is there a Pulitzer Prize for "Most Sycophantic" journalist?
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Wednesday, June, 24, 2009 1:29 PM buck writes:

Sgt

I believe the Blue Dogs are also Pro Second Amendment which gives them a whole lot more plausibility as Dems.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Wednesday, June, 24, 2009 4:22 PM Eric writes:

sgt relic

The Blue Dog dems and conservatives should start a new party that the Dems or repubs have failed to achieve, which is alot. The MSM's views forbid them from actually dissenting the president, or even a couple hard questions. Fox may be the only one that tries to be fair and gets RIPPED for it. The media will definitely want another term of Obama.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Wednesday, June, 24, 2009 8:44 PM Sgt Relic writes:

buck

I think your right about the 2nd amendment issue. Our "blue dog" democrat, Jim Webb, got into trouble over carry a gun into the Capitol but when he votes his voting record is straight from Harry Reid.

He just hauls out the gun thing for elections.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Wednesday, June, 24, 2009 8:58 PM Sgt Relic writes:

Eric

As I said to Buck; I just don't see any evidence by their voting records that "blue dogs" are any different than hard lefties. When the run they run on some conservative issues but they don't vote that way.

Maybe I'm missing something but I think the "Obama agenda in trouble" headlines are just to make it look like there is some opposition to his Marxist agenda but in the end this stuff is getting passed by big numbers.

IMO, the press is manufacturing these stories to avoid even talking to republicans.

I just don't see common cause for conservatives with these people.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Wednesday, June, 24, 2009 9:11 PM Gar Swaffar writes:

Common Cause

with any group of blue dog dems is a lost cause before it begins. They are conservaitve compared to someone like Hugo Chavez (mostly) or Fidel Castro (nearly always), but a far cry from being conservative by definition.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Wednesday, June, 24, 2009 9:12 PM Gar Swaffar writes:

Blue Dog Dems

= teats on a slab of bacon.
Useless.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Wednesday, June, 24, 2009 10:49 PM BrianR writes:

Guys


"Blue Dogs" would be epitomized by Zell Miller.

EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Thursday, June, 25, 2009 7:03 AM Sgt Relic writes:

Gar

That's my feeling too. I see from an interview "Green" Newt gave that this is one his brain f*rts.

There are 53 so called "blue dogs" in the coalition. A quick check shows just 6 of them voting against the stimulus bill. 6 also voted against the FDA encroachment bill.

Most of these people have lifetime ACU ratings ranging from an 8 to a whooping 38% conservative voting record.

Global warming makes more sense to me than this strategy he's floating.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Thursday, June, 25, 2009 7:17 AM Sgt Relic writes:

Brian

Miller was the last of the "southern" democrats and one of the few who didn't change parties when it became possible to get elected in the South as a Republican.

GA has 5 of these "blue dogs" and "Green" Newt is from GA. Coincidence?

This is just a variation on McAmnesty's strategy, just less workable. We are abandoning our quest for the mushy middle and now should be actively seeking out democrats to elect?

Somebody just shoot me now!
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Thursday, June, 25, 2009 7:37 AM Mrs. AL (Always Learning) writes:

Sgt Relic

Great analysis of the situation and you inspired a wealth of discussion here in your thread (taxed at 33% btw). And here's what came to my little mind after reading ...

Haven't we already lost the "two-party" system? Haven't we lost a press that is in any way shape or form objective? Appears to me these are consequences of losing our Republic and spiral downward to a "democracy" where the "state" is "in "in control" based upon who can garner the power. Seems to me personal responsibility and initiative are literally being bred out of the population.

Sorry to go on ... your article and the excellent discussion in the thread hit a nerve.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Thursday, June, 25, 2009 11:41 AM BrianR writes:

Yeah, Sarge


I know what you mean.

The only good thing I can say about most of the Blue Dogs is that they're pro-gun, and a bit less fiscally profligate.

Other than that, just more of the same old same old.

EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Thursday, June, 25, 2009 12:29 PM Sgt Relic writes:

Mrs AL

No need for apology. Your analysis is perfectly correct with maybe one exception: I'd be happy if we had just stopped at democracy at least that's a majority rules form of government.

We are now into Fascist National Socialism and that's not a good place to be!

Have you picked out your voluntary national service job yet?
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Thursday, June, 25, 2009 12:44 PM Sgt Relic writes:

Brian

That is the case on the 2nd amendment issue.

I've checking some of these "blues" on the ACU site. How can I put it? If these "dogs" were republicans they'd be Lincoln Chaffee.

Heath Shuler's voting record was 44% conservative in '07 but dropped to 24% in '08. Most of the stealth democrats in '06 showed strong in their first year but Red Nanny has them under control now. They all wanted to be reelected and that takes money.

DNC money!
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Thursday, June, 25, 2009 2:17 PM Mrs. AL (Always Learning) writes:

Sgt. Relic

Good point, guess we already spiraled even further into the abyss.

As for my "voluntary national service," don't forget I am the subject of profiling. I am a RWE. Therefore, I will be relegated to following D.C. politicans and cleaning up the dung they keep dropping. I won't have a chance to "volunteer."
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, June, 26, 2009 10:21 AM BrianR writes:

Yup


I never said they were "conservative"!

EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, June, 26, 2009 11:12 AM buck writes:

Blue Dogs vs Rinos

I guess when you come down to it it might be a little like swapping a lame mule for a blind mule...
But knowing how a pol would vote should count for something. The Rinos are good at backstabbing the constituents...
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, June, 26, 2009 11:46 AM Sgt Relic writes:

Mrs. AL

I thought that the left liked radicals?

As for the "volunteer" thing, that's what's known as campaign rhetoric, or so the dems keep telling us every time Obama breaks another campaign promise. He meant to say "mandatory"!
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, June, 26, 2009 11:59 AM Sgt Relic writes:

Brian

My point exactly. "Green" Newt seems to be of the impression that "blue dogs" are our natural allies. I think it's just more of the "we need to be more moderate" mantra.

Sorry Newt, no sale!
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, June, 26, 2009 12:12 PM Sgt Relic writes:

buck

As I said to Brian; this is just a variation on the GOP theme of the party becoming more moderate. Moderate of course is a misnomer, what they mean is more liberal.

No thanks!
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Sunday, June, 28, 2009 11:42 AM BrianR writes:

Newt?????


Gingrich? The moon-faced former conservative known as "Newt"?

He lost ALL conservative chops and creds with me when he sat on that couch on TV with Pelosi whining about "climate change". I don't care WHAT he's said since trying to make excuses for doing it. He's just another hack; a political has-been trying to resuscitate a long-dead career in the public eye.

If all the GOP has is a dinosaur like HIM.... well, that's like Dole and McIdiot. It was their "turns", too.

Huckleberry's just another RINO statist nanny-government "moderate". No thanks.

Palin has all the intellectual depth of tissue paper. Not Ready For Prime Time.

There are actually a few good options in the GOP: Hunter, Sessions, DeMint, Cole, Issa, Tancredo, Watts, a very few others. And yes, Jindal's in there. He's no amateur; he did win the governorship in Louisiana, a traditonal Democrat stronghold.

But the problem lies in the fact that at this point the GOP is under the control of the "moderates", those drones committed to what I call the California Strategy (and see how well it works here in my state) of "widening the base" by appealing to "moderates"and "independants" while minimizing the influence of the "fringe"... meaning traditional conservatives.

THAT'S what has to change; not go digging up old fossils from another era.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Sunday, June, 28, 2009 1:54 PM skep41 writes:

You Might Be Underestimating Palin

That Letterman business was really handled well. It showed that there was a potential cost to telling Palin jokes. It put every woman in the country on her side. Even my left-wing wife and her friends were talking about what a disgusting pig DL was. They had never said anything nice about Palin before. She humiliated him. Thats power. I think she's a very talented politician and is a force in the pop media. Your daughter's illegitimate kid and your characteristic RoseAnn Barr eyeglasses gets you into People Magazine right next to John and Kate's divorce. You cant buy that kind of ink. All the so-called MSM are irrelevant. Obama won the election in the pages of People and Us with his photogenic, magazine-ad persona. Palin can be that kind of 'celebrity' candidate. She's pro-energy, anti-tax, pro- development and has spoken openly and publicly about those things. She will be our first woman president.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Sunday, June, 28, 2009 3:15 PM BrianR writes:

Skep, Letterman was irrelevant

as far as I'm concerned. That whole thing was a sideshow.

She's an intellectual flyweight who's maybe appropriate as Governor of a state with a population smaller than Los Angeles, but doesn't have anywhere near the chops to be the President of the United States.

She's just not that bright.

She parrots conservative jingos and slogans without an understanding of the underlying issues involved. She pro-illegal alien, too. That alone is hugely problematic in and of itself, but it also illuminates the fact that she's clueless as to the meaning and reason of the rule of law.

Palin on Oct 23, on Univision (TV for Hispanics):

"Interviewer: To clarify, so you support a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants?

"Palin: I do because I understand why people would want to be in America. To seek the safety and prosperity, the opportunities, the health that is here. It is so important that yes, people follow the rules so that people can be treated equally and fairly in this country."


http://www.univision.com/content/content.jhtml?chid=3&schid =10414&secid=25534&cid=1716304&pagenum=2

She's also clueless on foreign policy and issues. Absolutely clueless, embarrassingly so.

EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Monday, June, 29, 2009 6:55 AM Sgt Relic writes:

Brian

You're right. Gingrich is just another stealth RINO. That commercial will be in my head until my dying day.

How anyone can take him seriously as a possible candidate for anything is beyond me. He left DC under a cloud and that cloud hasn't really dissipated. The moment he is running we will hear about his serial philandering, phony book deals, and all the other goodies the press has on him.

I don't see a change in the RNC strategy. They are still clinging to the notion that democrats will vote for them if they just become more socially liberal.

In fact, I think the moderates would love it if conservatives formed a third party leaving them to move to the left and become the "blue dog" party. Gingrich remembers '92 and he knows Clinton won with 41%.

Just a theory but I think it fits the current facts.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Monday, June, 29, 2009 7:12 AM Sgt Relic writes:

Skep

"Palin can be that kind of 'celebrity' candidate."

As I said to Saltwater back at the top of the comments, "I knew I'd get into to trouble on Palin. She may be just what is needed by the GOP to attract the younger voter but as we are seeing everyday with Zero, popularity doesn't necessarily translate to leadership ability."

If she was going to be running against Letterman I'm sure she would win big.

Call me old fashioned but I was really hoping for someone with a little more intellectual muscle than she showed in the last election.

It's hard come back from a beat down by Katie Couric!


EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Monday, June, 29, 2009 12:28 PM BrianR writes:

Sarge, I'm with you 100%


On top of all the other problems with Gingrich, it would be a reprise of the McAmnesty fiasco.

Remember how the MSM LOOOOOOVED him?..... Right up until the time he secured the nomination, at which point they turned on him like junkyard dogs.


They'd have a field day with Moonface.

And like you, that ad with Pelosi made me feel like some Mafia Don: "He's dead to me".


Palin is also a strategic disaster. No way can she survive extended scrutiny as the top of the ticket. She barely made it through for a very few weeks as the second-place nominee.

Not Ready For Prime Time... ever.

She reminds me of a high school Prom Queen or Head Cheerleader. Gets a lot of attention.

But not for her brains.

EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Monday, June, 29, 2009 1:33 PM Christopher writes:

Excellent

I don't really agree about the press choosing candidates for the GOP (I don't think they have that power) but they can move things in a direction. I also think that you are probably overestimaiting the number of conservatives who sat home and didn't vote. I'm yet to met someone who actually didn't vote.

However you are dead on about how conservatives should be wary of certain candidates being pushed, Romney in particular who in my mind should be booed off the stage by everyone , a man who said he was more for gay rights than Kennedy in 94, a protege of frm. Gov. Weld (who I love) who only after being elected became the face of the anti-gay marriage movement, was pro-choice for decades (made his wife give a donation to PP). Became magically converted to being called pro-life less than a year before he annouced his candidacy.

And get him off the stage when talking about health care, he proudly passed the most liberal health care plan in America with an individual mandate even Obama won't sign. It's bankrupting his state and yet he is the face for the GOP on this issue!
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Tuesday, June, 30, 2009 11:41 AM Sgt Relic writes:

Brian

"On top of all the other problems with Gingrich, it would be a reprise of the McAmnesty fiasco."

It would just be round 2, with the same outcome.

It's hard not to like Palin. She's pretty, she kills things and eats them. What's not to like?

I wonder however, if she would be talked about as a serious candidate if she looked like Bela Abzug? Helen Thomas?


EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Tuesday, June, 30, 2009 12:22 PM BrianR writes:

Perfect point, Sarge!


Palin's always been "The Candidate You'd Most Like To See In A Playboy Foldout".


But that was a GREAT point!

What if she looked like Sotomayor? Would anyone even give her the time of day?

EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Tuesday, June, 30, 2009 1:19 PM Sgt Relic writes:

Christopher

I was in the direct mail marketing business for over twenty years and in that time I ran hundreds of campaigns. I don't like the media but I will never doubt there influence on public opinion.

In Hollyweird they say there is no bad press only no press. Samey, same! The media can ignore a candidate which is sometimes worse than an outright attack.

Unfortunately, I know quite a number of people who didn't vote. The mantra goes, "they are all the same". (not that far wrong in the last election)

At the morning coffee stop I asked half a dozen "Joe Lunchpails" if they knew what congress did last Friday? No correct answers but they all knew Michael Jackson died.

That's something, and it isn't good.

EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Tuesday, June, 30, 2009 5:24 PM Gray Ghost writes:

Good Article Sarge

"Exactly right. Ever since Watergate, they all want to be Woodward and Bernstein and "change history".

Either by bringing down their "opposition", or "defending" their Prince."

BrianR has it correct. And the only solution (short of Hitler's 'Final Solution') is to constantly REFUSE to support the MSM. I too see the support growing from the MSM for Newt or a Republican Liberal. The MSM knows that O'Vomit has made some serious errors. These errors will affect the 2010 elections. But the MSM wants to "change history" and keep the "Leftward" movement going.

But I also feel the "wind" turning, while talking to people all over the country. However, it appears to be a very "racist" turning. White and Asian Americans are angry, very angry. Black and Hispanic Americans I am not so sure of.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Tuesday, June, 30, 2009 10:43 PM Keys to the Right writes:

It's downright disheartening

Sarge. IMO, the GOP establishment needs to be seriously shaken up so we don't get another RINO like McCain. Hunter and Tancredo are probably our best hopes. And if Ron Paul will just dump his archaic Isolationist views he might get my vote.
Good post Sarge. It's good to be back.
And if you wanna get the latest on the summer movies that are out, feel free to mosey on over to K to the R.
Keys to the Right ^^
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Tuesday, June, 30, 2009 11:04 PM Edamon50 writes:

On Palin and other things

On the Palin front, I think we may be judging too harshly and too hastily with her. Don't you think we owe it to her to see how she handles her time as governor and any subsequent terms as governor, before we write her off? I feel that some of this antipathy towards Palin by some on the right is not so much about her, as it is a continued pushback against the McCain candidacy. She is being tarred for having been McCain's running mate, and all the animus towards him is being poured out on her.

As for the media and its role, they did not pick the last GOP candidate...because if they had, Rudy would have been running against Hillary in November '08. Yes the media tries to influence who is a player in politics, but I believe that the people decide...for good or ill. If the people choose to be ignorant of issues and the posiions of the people they vote for they deserve the government they get. Tancredo, Thompson, et al had to be willing to push through the clutter and reach the people, yet they failed to do so. The media had some fault in this, but so did the candidates and their staffs. There are more media outlets these days than the traditional outlets, so getting your message out is up to the candidate.

*Plug alert*:The Spade on Obama, Iran, and Honduras!
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Wednesday, July, 01, 2009 6:55 AM Sgt Relic writes:

Ghost

Good point about the Watergate twins. That set the gold standard for lefty journalists but since they only focus on republicans they have missed a lot of opportunities to bring down presidents. An honest press would be having a field day with our current president.

The racist tag is inevitable. If you'll recall, when "Green" Newt came to power in '94 it was the "angry white man vote" that gave the congress to the GOP. Not angry voters, angry WHITE voters.

I see an opportunity developing again but the GOP is not poised to take advantage of it. IMO, successful challengers in 2010 are going to have to be people who can stand up in front of the Tea Party types and not get booed off the stage.

I'd like to run a campaign in 2010, for an independent candidate, on the theme of "Had Enough Change Yet?". I think it might be successful. Voters are sick of both parties!
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Wednesday, July, 01, 2009 7:07 AM Sgt Relic writes:

Keys

It's been a long time. Welcome back!

I agree that Hunter and Tancredo are still viable as candidates. I also am very high on Jim DeMint from SC. He gets it! He's the kind of conservative I was talking about in my comment to Ghost. DeMint can stand in front of a Tea Party protest and bring the house down.

What to say about Ron Paul? Most of what he says is just fine and then he wanders off in trutherland where steel doesn't melt and he loses me.

Also, his supporters are a bigger problem for me than Ron Paul. I just don't see myself calling our troops thug killers and the conspiracy stuff is just too unbelievable.

I'll be over soon!
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Wednesday, July, 01, 2009 7:37 AM Sgt Relic writes:

Edamon

I can't agree. In fact, I wrote a piece about it during the primaries. McCain got more press than any of the candidates with Rudy a close second. Romney got alternately blasted and praised, as did Huckleberry right at the end.

Thompson got some coverage but the story was always a variation on "no fire in the belly", he's an actor, he looks tired, and he takes too long to make a point.(Obama never made a point)

The conservative candidates got universally ignored. The RINO's got all the ink.(That's the press saying "which one of these aisle sitters do you want?)

Here's a link to a full story at Media Research, a watchdog group that counts the number of press and TV stories, it's a long one but it's worth reading to understand exactly how much influence the press has with average voter.

BTW, average voter does not equate to the political junkies here at TH! HaHaHa!

Only time will tell on Palin. I think conservatives WANT her to do well but I'm not convinced she's up to it. There is a lot we don't know about her. It took me until after the election to find that she was pro-amnesty.

We know quite a bit about her personal life, how she dresses, you know, all the usual American Idol stuff, but that's not a criteria I base my vote on.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Wednesday, July, 01, 2009 9:24 AM Edamon50 writes:

Sarge

I am well acquainted with the MRC (I'm a member at NewsBusters and have TimesWatch as a favorite place) and I respect their analyses. But we have to agree to disagree on this ossue, because the voters eventually chose whom to vote for in both the primaries and the general election. And while the press has some serious influence, I believe that the importance of the press is seriously overblown at times.

If the press were as influential as many think, how did Bush ever beat McCain in the primaries for the 2000 election? As I recall, the press was all over McCain and he was calling them his constituency at the time...yet the people chose the more conservative Bush over him at the ballot box. And in both of Bush's electoral wins, the press was firmly in the corner of the Democrat (as usual) yet Bush was able to defeat both Gore and Kerry, in spite of overwhelming media antipathy.

So as I see it, in 2008 media pumping up McCain had less to do with his winning the nomination than the stupid GOP allowing open primaries in key states. And the problems the conservative candidates had ranged from lack of national name recognition (Hunter), a sense of being a one issue candidate (Tancredo), and simply getting too late a start and blowing a growing buzz (Thompson). Those problems were just as bad for the candidates as any media opposition.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Wednesday, July, 01, 2009 12:55 PM BrianR writes:

Edamon, I have to agree with Sarge


If you look back at my essays from early in last year's campaign season, you'll see I used both Jindal AND Palin as examples of how real conservatism sells.

It wasn't until AFTER she joined McDolt's campaign, and I got a chance to read and judge her intellect and knowledge, that I backed away from that assessment of her.

I find her completely underwhelming.

EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Wednesday, July, 01, 2009 1:00 PM BrianR writes:

PS, Edamon, as to Bush's victories


Yes, the MSM was anti-Bush, but in those elections the gun issue played BIG!

Remember the MSM publishing all those idiotic staged photo ops of Kerry and Edwards on their "duck hunts"? Gore trying to sound like a pro-gunner?


Both times, Bush won by being pro-gun when it was a hot issue.

Which is also one of the reasons why McBonehead lost the primaries in 2000, BTW. The NRA endorsed Bush. McAmnesty had a "C" rating (as he still does, BTW) from the NRA, and an "F" from GOA and SAF.


EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Wednesday, July, 01, 2009 9:30 PM Edamon50 writes:

Okay Brian & Sarge

I'm not here to act as a Palin booster, or say she is the future...just that disqualifying her from the 2012 race in 2009 is a bit premature, IMO. You may find Palin underwhelming, but that is not to say that she cannot do some growing between now and then, as most politicians tend to mature as they learn the nuances of harball politics at the national level.

As for Jindal, I think throwing him out on the basis of one speech is way too hasty! That guy won as an unabashed conservative in a state that is generally dominated by the Democrats, and he won handily. And his positions and polices are as conservative as can be, so saying that his performance in responding to Obama is an automatic disqualifier is wrongheaded. Personally, I think than Jindal is doing things exactly the way he should be if he wants to be a player in 2012. He is at home in Louisiana doing the business that the people elected him to do and changing the real culture of political coruption that has reigned supreme in Louisiana for decades. He is establishing a record that he can point to, that hopefully will be filled with successes, and he can say that he has governed a state with huge challengesand brough them through. More than John Ensign or Mark Sanford ever were, Bobby Jindal may be the conservative hope for 2012 if all goes well. And I don't think one conservative will look at his record in Louisiana at that point and say, "Yeah that Jindal's a good conservative, but do you remember that speech he gave? He's gotta be a better speech maker to get my vote, record and principles be damned!"
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Thursday, July, 02, 2009 12:20 AM BrianR writes:

Wait a sec


I never threw Jindal out. I LIKE the guy. HIM I could vote for. But unless Palin grows some major brain cells between now and 2012, I'll be throwing my vote to someone else... again.

EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Thursday, July, 02, 2009 12:28 AM Keys to the Right writes:

Sarge and Brian

I agree with you about Jindal Brian, he just needs to mature a little and get a little more experience as governor. (Can't say I'll ever give my vote to Gov. Perry if he decides to run for Prez however.) Plus, if Palin can shed that hick facade she displays she may actually have a chance.
Sarge, thanks for stopping by and yes I did hear about Jacko, heard to much about it on the first day.
Keys to the Right ^^
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Thursday, July, 02, 2009 12:56 PM BrianR writes:

Hahahaha, Keys!


Jacko?


Did something happen to Jacko?



The celebs are dropping like flies. In a week:

Ed McMahon, Farrah Fawcett, Jacko, Fred Travalena, Billy Mays, Karl Malden, Harv Presnell.

A lotta new openings in show biz. I may need to dust off my resume, get new head shots, and get out there.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Thursday, July, 02, 2009 5:34 PM Sgt Relic writes:

Edamon

We'll just have to disagree.

I think that the fact an MRC even exists speaks to the evidence of the power of the media.

You are correct. Hunter, Tancredo, Huckleberry and even Romney didn't have a lot of national exposure but then neither did Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton or his majesty Barack the Magnificent.

It was the media that introduced those names to America not some itinerant ACORN worker.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, July, 03, 2009 6:13 AM Sgt Relic writes:

Edamon

I'll stipulate to the fact that things can change in politics at light speed and a couple years is a lifetime on the national stage.

Jindal got a "rising star" nod by being asked to do the rebuttal speech to the non-State of the Union speech. I was fully prepared to be pleased by his speech but was sadly disappointed. I didn't count him out but he's going to have to show better if he gets another chance.

Likewise, I was ready to give Palin a huge amount of credit for what I hoped was going to be a beatdown on "Perky" Katie Couric, even though I know Katie's a lightweight. Again, a poor performance left me feeling she wasn't ready for the big show. That could change. Obama couldn't string a sentence together early on.

IMO, the GOP nominee in '12 is going to have to be a strong conservative speaker on the level of a Ronald Reagan to have any chance of unseating Obama as an incumbent.

Obama is short on substance and long on meaningless rhetoric. IMO, he is vulnerable to a conservative candidate who can articulate that lack of substance and do it on the fly.

The 2012 election is going to be 1980 not 2000.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, July, 03, 2009 6:44 AM Sgt Relic writes:

Keys

Of course I was being facetious about MJ but unfortunately there is no font for sarcasm.

My wife tells me I'm heartless when celebrities die. I disagree with her. I don't know these people. How upset am I supposed to get?

When Elvis died I told her, "Gee, I hope I don't die sitting on the crapper!". Now that was a genuine sentiment!

I think my comment on the passing of John Lennon was more like, "well, I guess this means no reunion!".

All I said this time was that I thought children everywhere were safer tonight and suddenly I'm the second coming of Dr. Mengele!

BTW, Michael Jackson is STILL dead. (this line stolen directly from SNL Weekend Update's Chevy Chase who is still alive)
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, July, 03, 2009 7:35 AM Sgt Relic writes:

Keys, Brian, Edamon, All

It was never my intention to attack Palin or Jindal. I did point to the small track record they have thus far accumulated and in my estimation it is not enough to beat an incumbent.

It is never too soon for the activists to begin looking for a possible candidate. Obama and his administration have never shifted out of campaign mode and conservatives should be cognizant of that fact.

For myself, I am not going to be satisfied with a status quo candidate which is what we are seeing when the media submits to even mention republicans or conservatives.

Despots recognize the power of the media whether we choose to acknowledge that power or not. Every dictator in history starts by seizing the means of communication.

Our founders sought a free press unfettered by the restraint of government. We failed!
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, July, 03, 2009 11:00 AM BrianR writes:

Sarge, again, I agree with you


On Jacko: I made the same joke: "Adolescent boys everywhere are safer now".

Like you, I never get invested in the death of some celeb. I can't even understand why people get their knickers in a knot about it. They're strangers! If I got upset every time some stranger died... well, there are people dying every minute of every day somewhere.

This is all part and parcel of our sob-sister culture that's sprung up over the last few decades. Outpourings of manufactured grief. When Princess Di died, I thought the world was going to need a dose of Prozac. Preferably in suppository form.

As far as I'm concerned... BFD.



As to a conservative candidate for 2012, again I think you're on the money. And I've repeatedly said that we have good options: Sessions, DeMint, Issa, Hunter, Jindal (yes, I like him), Cole, Tancredo, a small handful of others.

NOT Gingrich (dinosaur has-been former conservative), nor Palin (intellectual midget), nor another "moderate" of any stripe.



EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, July, 03, 2009 7:33 PM BrianR writes:

Weeeelll... on Palin


She just resigned as Governor.


That's it for her. Stick a fork in her, because she's done.

There's no way you resign your post as Governor of a state -- BEFORE even completing your first term -- and come back hoping for national office later.

More proof that she just doesn't get it, if that's what she had in mind.

This whole "politics" thing was just "above her pay grade".

EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Saturday, July, 04, 2009 10:29 AM Sgt Relic writes:

Brian

"Preferably in suppository form."

This could be the answer to climate change! If the main ingredient is CO2 it would, given the number of suppositories that it would require in America today alone, provide the carbon sequestration that the "Climate Kings" think is necessary to SAVE THE PLANET!

You are dead on with your list, (yes, I too would like to see Jindal redeem himself)that's the people I want to hear from. New faces, new ideas, and solid conservative principles is what is needed, not the wrinkled face of the status quo.

I agree that Palin has just made a major misstep. Her resignation will be portrayed as "resigned under a cloud" by the media and the democrat opposition. (that's redundant isn't it?)

I suppose that she thinks she needs to spend more time in the lower 48 if she wants keep her name in the news. The democrat campaign talking point is going to read, "When the going gets tough, Palin resigns!". Bet on it!
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Saturday, July, 04, 2009 10:54 AM BrianR writes:

Sarge


Exactly. That's EXACTLY how it will always be portrayed, even by any primary opponents within her own party..... and they're RIGHT! That's the thing.


No one will ever trust her again. The biggest act of political suicide since Nixon.

There's no excuse short of major illness of oneself or an immediate family member that can possibly justify just abandoning your post like that.

In the military, as you know, that's called "dereliction of duty"... possibly "desertion".

EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Sunday, August, 23, 2009 5:32 PM wil writes:

The answer

to the power of the press is to do something about it. Blogs help. Conservatives going into media related lines of work would be better. If you (like I) work outside of media fields, supporting financially voices of conservatism is important. Buy things their advertisers are selling, buy their newspapers or magazines, but use the power of the market to build an opposition voice. Its all we have left.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Monday, August, 24, 2009 10:14 AM Sgt Relic writes:

wil

Thanks for stopping an commenting!

Since I retired last year I no longer work...period! HaHa!

When I was employed I owned a direct mail marketing and printing company. Technically that's a media enterprise since our primary focus was to influence others, including political campaigns.

While I fully agree that we must support those voices who are carrying the message of liberty, I have also come to understand that it is not as simple as just writing a check to the RNC.

The title "conservative" has lost much of it's former cachet due to the inconsistent application of conservative principles by so-called conservative representatives.

Who can forget the specter of "Mr Conservative", Green Newt, playing slap and tickle with Red Nanny on that couch on the beach. That, in an Al Gore production of a green scam into the bargain?

Getting younger conservative voices into the media, including popular culture, is also vital but the deck is stacked against them.

Yours is an excellent comment and probably contains, in just a few words, more than enough if expanded upon to fill out an essay series.

Great comment!!!
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive