When the Gate KeepersCrash the Party

The recent revelations of a 'vast left-wing conspiracy' among journalists provides a reasonable hypothesis as to why certain stories 'make the news' while others never seem to burst out of the 'FoxNews bubble' and into the mainstream media.

Now we can understand why the story of Obama's 20-year relationship with the radically wrong Rev. Right never gained the traction it deserved during the campaign.  Could it also explain why Obama avoided the hard-hitting interviews we expect for any Presidential aspirant, much less one so seemingly devoid of executive experience yet surrounded by questionable associations?  By contrast, the media's treatment of Sarah Palin quickly devolved from a focus on her purportedly insufficient executive experience to the tabloid-like accusations questioning her commitment to motherhood.

Not that any of this is a surprise to me personally.   I have joined the upwards of 100,000 pro-life advocates converging on Washington to peacefully protest abortion each January.  One might think that such a massive event would necessarily entail news coverage on a similar scale.  But one would be incorrect.  When the few seconds the network news devotes to coverage is dominated not by the peaceful protesters, but by footage of eight snarly women waving signs protesting the protest - it becomes pretty clear that someone, somewhere, is behind the proverbial curtain holding the lever that determines who gets to be news and who doesn't.  In the same vein the tea party rallies were ignored for month and months, until it was simply no longer possible to deny their existence, so the mass media  instead began to subtly (at first) apply the repulsive label of racist to them, in the hopes of denigrating if not their existence, than certainly the integrity of their message.

That 'big journalism' has always tilted left is not in question, and one only has to read a daily newspaper with an eye towards the insertion of opinion to find glaring examples everywhere.  The frustration this garners among those of us who really do want "just the facts, ma'am" when we view news (as distinguished from opinion) is what catapulted Fox to the top of the ratings game in the first place.  Moderates of all stripes, conservatives, libertarians -  in fact, anyone holding to a different view of the world than a liberal lens permits, viewed the cable upstart as a welcome respite from the 'News for the Benighted' that the rest of the media outlets were producing.   And like any spoiled child used to getting their way, they don't appreciate it when one of their own quits the game or changes sides (see John Stossel's article, below).  This is why the mainstream media pundits maintain to this day, despite all evidence to the contrary, a petulant attitude of disbelief and derision at the success of FoxNews.

This is not just conspiratorial musing for the sake of thinking aloud:  even the discussion of the possibility of suppressing certain stories, or publicly disparaging those whose views would detract from the 'cause', represents at the very least a blatant and callous disregard of a sacred public trust granted a privileged few.  In the past journalistic ethics have been held in sober regard specifically because journalists have been viewed as indispensable 'watchdogs' of government (and other institutions).  But when they decide en masse to influence rather than report, then the watchdogs have become no better than ravenous wolves, and the trust we have granted to them is no longer deserved nor wise to extend.

Further Reading:
http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/2010/0720/JournoList-Is-call-them-racists-a-liberal-media-tactic/(page)/2
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704684604575381083191313448.html
http://townhall.com/columnists/JohnStossel/2009/11/04/the_double_standard_about_journalists_bias

PORN: The Sexual Revolution's Slave Master

This is the most in-depth scientific article I have ever read on this subject, and the facts it brings to light have huge societal implications.  These are not the words of some sexually repressed prude longing for the days of pleasure-less sex and puritan attitudes; this is neuroscience and its attending biological, psychological and societal implications, and it is eye-opening to say the least.  So whether you think porn is no big deal, or struggle with it yourself or know someone who does, this article convincingly outlines why this insidious and ubiquitous monument to the freedom won for us in the revolution was no gift.   Thanks for nothing, Dr. Kinsey:

http://www.salvomag.com/new/articles/salvo13/13hilton.php

The Tax Tsunami On The Horizon - Investors.com

The Tax Tsunami On The Horizon - Investors.com

Extraordinary Usurpations

Since January 20, 2009, the Obama administration has undertaken a multitude of actions which together constitute government overreach of an intolerable magnitude.  In the span of 18 months what slowly began as a quietly  collective groan from those who are attentive to such matters, is slowly coalescing into a unified voice of righteous indignation, as Americans of every stripe are beginning to realize just how susceptible we are to destruction from within.  I hope that we are not too late.

We are led by a Commander-in-Chief who has repeatedly displayed a certain detachment to, and even disdain for, the Constitution he was sworn to uphold.  During his debut on the international stage, he seemed far more comfortable apologizing for America's sins than he was affirming her moral leadership and strength,  resulting in  a weakening of our standing with global allies while simultaneously emboldening our enemies.  He has raised blaming his predecessor for our country's ills to a petulant art form, never tiring of it after 18 months in office.  Why doesn't he realize that we tired of his finger-pointing long ago?   No self-respecting mother would allow that kind of behavior from her 8-year old, and it is embarrassing to see it in my President.

Domestically, in Obama's hostile takeover of entire sectors of private enterprise, he has caused structural damage to our economy and stifled growth like no other leader in recent memory.  One of the more egregious examples of his control-freak style of governing includes his legion of non-vetted, personally appointed czars with far-reaching powers, all of whom are free to operate with neither the benefit of congressional oversight nor the scrutiny of the American public who pays their salaries.  This goes entirely counter to the very principal of checks and balances that our form of government was structured to uphold.  Another example is Obama's use of the public's checkbook to purchase private corporations  (GM), while simultaneously preserving bloated and unsustainable union deals (which were, not surprisingly,  part and parcel of GM's downfall in the first place).  

There are other violations and usurpations, but the one with the most immense negative consequences may be the healthcare overhaul (which may itself be disastrously surpassed by the financial overhaul, but we will have to wait and see how that monstrosity shakes out).  In this convoluted patchwork of regulations, there are a multitude of issues with which to find fault.  One that is clear is the requirement for a citizen to purchase a product (insurance) simply because they are breathing.  This has never been done before, is not permissible under the constitution, and runs completely counter to the very notion of individual liberty embodied in our founding documents.   In subsequent lawsuits (not surprisingly) brought on by several states, I have read that the government will apparently refute this claim of unconstitutionality by claiming that the fees imposed for non-compliance amount to nothing more than a 'tax' and are therefore constitutional.  Now if that makes sense to you, I'd like to hear how.   Never mind we were promised otherwise.  Promises, we are learning, are for people, not potentates.

Up until now America has been a leader in healthcare outcomes, and has stood at the forefront of medical innovation and new technologies to further improve those outcomes.  Leaders from other countries don't go to France or England for their surgeries - they come to the United States.  There are problems with our system, to be sure, but what we have produced in this monstrosity is akin to going to the doctor for a migraine and having him perform a full frontal lobotomy.  The truth is that in America, virtually everyone has access to health care, but not everyone has access to health insurance.  Now that will change.  Everyone will have access to health insurance, but not everyone will have access to health care.  Because rationing is coming; it is inevitable in the system Obama built.  Is this the 'change' we were looking for?

The usurpation of our liberties and freedom by the sometimes illegal actions of this administration must be met with appropriate and serious challenges.  We have waited too long to continue to 'hope for the best', as we have watched too many of our precious freedoms melt away like sealing wax.  Hope doesn't make wrong right, hope doesn't improve our economy, hope doesn't improve our standing internationally, and hope doesn't win wars.  A return to the founding principles embodied in our constitution is the only thing that can turn this ship around before it sails off into the ash heap of what could have been, had we not let our country go.