Susan Roesgen: Poster Girl for Unethical Journalism

Susan Roesgen is a "reporter" for CNN. With all due respect that "R" word has to be in quotes. She is emblematic of how so many in the mainstream media have strayed far away from any semblance of ethical & professional journalism. The majority of the Americans who took the time and made the effort to peacefully protest their displeasure at the massive amount of debt their government is racking up are not "extreme right-wing nutbars" like Roesgen and her colleagues would have you believe. Yet she could not hold back her personal disdain for all of them, including the man she started to "interview" but then rudely interrupted when what he was saying didn't fall into line with her own political views. What kind of REAL journalist would do that?

The United States of America was founded by citizens just like you see here in Chicago, who were angry at an unaccountable, uncaring government that had grown deaf to their very legitimate concerns. Is history repeating itself? Make no mistake, these people are angry at both political parties and the politicians within. This is not so much a protest at Barack Obama, as it is against the irresponsibility of government as a whole.

As a thought experiment, imagine Susan Roesgen transported back to 1776, shoving her microphone into the faces of the citizens of the original colones and asking them why they were revolting. Then, when not getting the answer she seeketh, pulling away and screaming, "What dost though protest against?! The King of England hath given you so much!"

---

Update: The following comment came from a fellow on another site. He lives in SE Florida:

I attended the Tea Party protest that was held in my town, more people than expected showed up and for such a small town, it was pleasantly surprising. One big issue that is drawing alot of justified criticism is the President’s first spending bill, that was over 1,000 pages long but was quickly voted on and signed before anyone had ample time to even read it! Any Republican politician who thinks that it was simply an anti-Democrat or anti-Obama protest is kidding themselves, they started the out of control spending when they were in power and the donkeys just put it all on steroids once they got control of the entire government. When I returned home and watched the coverage of the various protests that occurred all around this country, I was struck by several different observations:

Despite the fact that there were nearly a thousand of these Tea Parties drawing hundreds of thousands of citizens, the crowds were energetic, but very peaceful. There were no riots, burned or overturned vehicles, physical clashes with law enforcement personnel, beatings, property damage or crude effigies of anyone being defiled or destroyed in any way, quite a departure from what we usually see from large left wing demonstrations on any subject. Most participants carried handmade signs, and people of all ages, political ideologies & ethnic groups participated.

The majority of the news media who continually gets clobbered by Fox in the ratings no matter what the time slot tried to downplay the numbers or passion of those of us who chose to attend these rallies, disregarding the fact that many turned out in bad weather to make their voices heard, and these so-called journalists chose to insult us as well which is why Beck’s & O’Reilly’s re-runs beat the prime time programming of CNN, ABC & MSNBC combined in the ratings, Fox dominates the daily 5pm to 11pm time slot by a very large margin. As for this alleged “reporter”, she’s a total disgrace and would be utterly embarrassed if she had any professional pride at all, which she obviously lacks! She humiliated herself and thanks to the Internet, her shameful attempt to “be the story” vs. simply reporting will likely be replayed & laughed at from now until eternity.

Shooting Down the Mistruths About Sarah Palin - Episode #87,431

I've been having a debate of sorts with a fellow from the UK. He left a rather nasty comment on a video of mine, taking some rather egregious shots at Sarah Palin. I knew the statements he was making to be absolutely false, so I decided to show him the error of his ways. It's not my intention to reshape his political views but hopefully he'll learn a small lesson about backing up one's statements with facts. Shown below is what I wrote him.

---

You're in the UK? I frequently listen to BBC London. Based on what I hear from the many callers - their words, not mine - your country is doomed unless it dramatically changes it's walk down the socialist garden path.

Ditto for California by the way. And in case you're going to tell me that Schwarzenegger is a Republican, in fact he's a RINO and is very much governing like a UK Labour Party minister.

Let's go through your points:

1. You stated that Palin thought Africa was a country. In fact, it was a McCain policy advisor named Martin Eisenstadt, who leaked out this Palin comment. There's one problem though: Mr. Eisenstadt doesn't exist. Please read this.
   
   
2. You stated that Palin pretended to know what the Bush Doctrine was. I saw the interview with Charlie Gibson. That's not precisely what happened, was it? In fact, what transpired was that Palin was seeking clarification from Gibson about what he meant by the term "Bush Doctrine". You think that makes her an idiot? The originator of that term was Charles Krauthammer. Here's what he had to say about the Gibson-Palin discussion.
   

Do you now admit that you were wrong in both cases?

I assure you that it's not my intention to ridicule you. But I'm an engineer and build software for a living. Plus I'm half-German. So forming my opinions based on facts is part of my DNA. And when I draw conclusions based on false facts, I admit I was wrong and apologize.

As for Jon Stewart, you're convinced that he attacks both sides with his humour? Sorry, can't agree with you there. Like most of the American media and Hollywood glitterati, he has never and I predict will never take any substantive shot at Barack Obama.

Like you, I am far from religious. BUT I am absolutely fed up with people thinking they can use Christians as their new preferred kick dog. As I've said to several ex-friends, who I've lost over this issue, "You would never say such things about Blacks or Asians or Jews or Muslims. But because they're Christians, you somehow think they're fair game. I have some dear old friends who are devout Christians and so when you make such jokes I view you as personally attacking them and their beliefs."

Anyway amigo, as I stated earlier, it was not my intention to ridicule you. But I do hope you take the time to FULLY research your statements before you make them in the future.

In the same way that I listen to the BBC through the Internet, I hope I can make two recommendations to you:

• http://DennisMillerRadio.com
• http://DennisPrager.townhall.com

I don't agree entirely with what either man says all the time, but I do find them both to be interesting most of the time. Listening to them may provide you with a little balance over the Left leaning media you seem inclined to solely follow.

---

Incidentally, I currently don't have much confidence that Sarah Palin will be able to get past the "stupid white trash moron" moniker that the MSM very deliberately gave her. I don't agree with this assessment, of course, but I don't deny that it is present in the minds of many.

To demonstrate how incredibly corrupt the MSM has become, Katie Couric is actually getting an award for her attempts to destroy Sarah Palin's character. Of course, that's not the way it's being portrayed but that is precisely what occurred. John Ziegler has further thoughts here. Apparently he attended the "ceremonies" today and was arrested! It's my understanding that he'll be appearing on Dennis Miller's show tomorrow.

The New Bigotry of the Secular Left

1692: Salem Witch Hunt

2009: Ottawa Christian Hunt

A Few Thoughts on Newspapers

A favourite writer of mine, Amy Alkon, posted this piece on her blog. Here's the comment I left her:

If a food manufacturer were consistently putting out a product that made people sick, would they be allowed to continue "as is"?

If a courier company consistently delivered packages late and damaged, would people continue to give them their business?

If an engineering firm consistently erected bridges that collapsed, would they be allowed to continue their work "as is"?

My PROBLEM with the MSM is that their "News" is no longer N-E-W-S. Most every story I read has a significant bias to it, which makes me immediately distrust the writer and the story.

Editorials can be slanted any which way the writer(s) want but not news.

The day that journalists once again decide to follow professional ethics then I will support newspapers again. Right now they're neither professional nor ethical.

Bill Good = Ignoramus Extraordinaire

CKNW's Bill Good is such an ignorant ass, when he wants to be. This morning he had Dennis Miller on for a short 15 minute segment. Good appeared shocked when Miller stated that he thought extremely highly of George Bush's stance on Radical Islam and its threat to our civilization.

After Miller had left, Good said to a caller, "Oh Dennis Miller just thinks that way because he's very conservative." He also added, on another tangent, that "Obama is doing everything he can to reach out to Republicans".

So many things wrong with these statements...

First off, the manner in which he used the term "very conservative" was clearly a derogatory slam against Miller. Though Good reminds everyone on a daily basis about how "centrist" he is, clearly the years of drinking CBC Kool-Aid have had a lasting effect. All members of the Conservative Party of Canada should be aware of this man's strong bias every time they get interrogated ... errr "interviewed" by him.

Secondly, in point of fact, Dennis Miller is not "very conservative". In general, he's extremely liberal on most social issues. It's just that with this one issue of Radical Islam, he has drawn a line in the sand to protect his family and their future. Too bad the Bill Good's of the world think that self-preservation is an insane notion.

Finally, as for Obama reaching out to Republicans, if Good didn't have the Man Crush on The Messiah that he does, he would clearly realize that exactly the opposite has occurred.

The state of the Canadian Media in 2009 = Pathetic!

---

Update: Here's an addendum to my hypothesis that most of the media are mere puppets for Barack Obama (provided by SDA regular "ET") :

Yes, the media are lying. But so is Obama and his team and the Democrats. When Obama says 'bipartisanship', he doesn't mean that the Democrats and the Republicans will work on policies and programs together. Heck no. What he means is that the Republicans will not dissent, will not criticize, will not reject His Will.

Obama is a Sovereign Ruler. As in the Leviathan. An Absolute Sovereign who rules by Divine Will. The people, both in their states, and against Amendment 10, give up ALL rights, even the right to disagree. There is no 'right of dissent', no 'right of rebellion'.

This is a unitary, monlithic authoritarianism, invested with a messianic divinity, inalienable and it cannot err. The Sovereign is always Right and the only interaction of the people to the Sovereign - is devotion and acceptance. That's the Obamic mode.

Let's watch how and whether the States stand up to this transformation of the US government from a constitutional democracy by the people, for the people, of the people...to an absolutist state governed by a Sovereign Will unfettered by law, where the people have lost all rights, including the right to rebel.

And let's watch and see how this Sovereign Will moves to inhibit and prevent questions, criticism and dissent. The repression of the Washington Post 'chimpanzee cartoon' and Obama's personal attacks against Hannity and Limbaugh are only the beginning.

Is Early Sex Education Encouraging Children to Have Sex?

Lost in Translation [Mark Steyn]

Yesterday I wrote about Britain's pint-sized pop of the week, Alfie Patten, the four-foot middle-schooler about to undergo a paternity test. A reader adds:

Besides “financially,” the other word that stood out in that story was “despite.” As in:

Britain has the highest underage pregnancy rate in western Europe, despite channelling substantial resources into sex education for children as young as five.

On this side of the pond we would say “because of” or “due to;” perhaps you could explain this alternate British meaning of “despite” to your American readers?

Yes, note that, even though Judith Woods is using Alfie as the emblem of what she calls a "broken Britain", her language betrays a lot of the same assumptions as the toxic nanny state.

02/17 10:25 AM

The Los Angeles Times' Journey Down into the Abyss

It wasn't long ago that we learned that the Tribune Company, which owns the Los Angeles Times, filed bankruptcy protection. I did some research to discover their astonishing drop in circulation:

Patrick Frey, who blogs under the moniker "Patterico", just did a comprehensive analysis of the abysmal track record of the Los Angeles Times in 2008. It's an absolutely fascinating read and a wake-up call for all American newspaper publishers. But will any listen? Some cynically say there's no need because now with Obama in power such newspapers can apply for a financial bailout and become official state-owned mouthpieces, akin to Izvestia and Pravda in the old USSR. They won't have to change their editorial policies and shoddy journalism one bit, as they've been acting as unofficial propaganda arms of the Democrat Party for years.

Zellers = Stupidity Plus

Apparently Zellers, owned by the Hudson's Bay Company, has imposed a ban on "Christmas". So I've decided to place a personal ban on both stores. Click on the link to go to the actual web page.

---

Update: Here's the response I just received from Zellers:

Thank you for your e-mail and taking the time to contact us. Just to
clarify, Holiday tree is a brand name for our Christmas trees. If you
read this week's flyer, we clearly emphasize Christmas as ?A special
time for making lasting memories while celebrating the birth of Jesus
Christ.? Merry Christmas!

Regards,
Susan
HBC Customer Service

---

Update #2: David Menzies shares his thoughts

Formal Complaint to the CBC Ombudsman

Here is a copy of the complaint against Don Newman that I've just sent to the CBC Ombudsman, Vince Carlin:


Dear Mr. Carlin:

As you very well know, our great country has gone through the most significant constitutional crisis of our lifetime. To say that it was, and still is, an extremely serious situation would be the understatement of the millennium. The actions of Don Newman throughout all of this have been nothing short of despicable, divisive, and downright dangerous. If he were merely an editorial pundit then I could offer little objection. But a major portion of his role at the taxpayer supported CBC is to be a fair & balanced moderator. In this capacity he earns an 'F'.

His behaviour has been nothing short of highly partisan in support of the Coalition and against the Conservatives. Examples are aplenty. Let me provide you two. On the one hand he was antagonistic, rude, and utterly dismissive of Conservative MP John Baird in the recent interview with him. On the other hand, here's a description of what transpired when he interviewed Liberal MP Derek Lee:

Big Loser: Derek Lee. CBC was desperate to fill air time as they waited for Stephen Harper to finish his chat with Michaelle Jean, so they made the mistake of interviewing Lee, who promptly compared Harper's request to suspend Parliament to the burning of the German Reichstag by the Nazis in 1933. Yeah Derek, they're exactly alike: a party of murderous thugs burning Parliament to the ground is just like the Prime Minister driving to Rideau Hall to request a temporary halt in proceedings while he prepares a budget. How astute of you to spot the similarities.

Source: http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/fullcomment/archive/2008/12/04/winners-and-losers.aspx

It is imperative to note that Mr. Newman did not object to this outrageous comment whatsoever. Yet, he seemed to have no problem objecting to most everything said by MP Baird. Would viewers be wrong to conclude that Mr. Newman actually shares a similar view as MP Lee that Stephen Harper's recent actions are comparable to those of Adolf Hitler's Nazis in 1933? I ask this question not flippantly but absolutely literally.

To end this momentous week on a sour note, we get this very one-sided diatribe from Don Newman: http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2008/12/05/f-vp-newman.html

In the realm of Journalistic Ethics at the CBC, is there not a basic requirement for your on-air staff to publicly disclose their clear biases before engaging in an interview? If I'm not mistaken, on every business program it is a mandatory requirement for all involved to fully disclose any stocks they own and/or other company interests they may have related to the discussion at hand. Let me assure you that in Mr. Newman's case, it is a widely held belief of many CBC viewers I've spoken with that he has direct loyalties to the Liberal Party of Canada.

To resolve this complaint to my satisfaction, any of the following would be sufficient:

• Move Don Newman into a role solely as a pundit and clearly have the words "Liberal Party Strategist" appear underneath his name each time he appears.
• Require that all interviews he undertakes be done with a conservative-leaning journalist as well, somewhat in the format of "Hannity & Colmes" on Fox News in the U.S.

Finally, please note that my insistence for fair & balanced reporting from Mr. Newman is in no way different from what your past head of CBC News, John Cruickshank, publicly stated a little over two months ago: http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2008/09/28/f-vp-cruickshank.html

I eagerly and respectfully await your response.

Sincerely,

Robert W.
Vancouver, BC

The Magic Number "62"

Pierre Bourque is reporting tonight that a recent poll indicates that 62% of Canadians are angry at the Coalition.

Does this number sound familiar? It is EXACTLY the same percentage of voters that we were told all week were against Harper and thus supposedly in support of the Coalition. In other words, the Radical Left mouthpieces saw that the Conservatives had won 38% of the popular vote in the recent election, so they pulled out their calculators and did the math: 100% - 38% = 62%

On & on they went:

• 62% of Canadians support the Coalition
• 62% of Canadians elected a Coalition to govern Canada
• 62% of Canadians want Harper defeated
  

Anyone who has worked on a farm knows that bullshit can be shoveled forward for a time but eventually you look down and there's nothing left to push forward.

Such is the case with most everything that comes out of the mouths of Canada's Left these days it seems.

Christy Clark: Liberal Hack

I happened to catch Christy Clark's show on CKNW this afternoon. It's beyond hilarious how she pretends to be unbiased and centrist, when in fact her and her husband, Mark Marrison, are deeply connected to the federal Liberal Party of Canada.

Listening to her talk with a political science professor from the University of Victoria, it was indistinguishable from the Liberal Party Rah Rah Rah that one constantly hears on the CBC.

Analysis of the Sarah Palin Hoax

Barack Obama and Bill Ayers

After you read the NY Times article on Bill Ayers, be sure to read this one on the same subject by Stanley Kurtz, an academic researcher who has devoted much time to the subject.

The contrast is a perfect example of how a MSM organization like the NY Times can spin a story any way they wish. And anyone who doesn't realize that the 'Times is not a de facto PR rep for the Obama campaign has flooded their brain with too much O'Kool-Aid.

Heather Mallick: Absolute Coward!

She can dish it out but cannot take any criticism, not a tiny weeny bit of it. Pathetic!

Full-sized version here

Sandra Bernhard: Just Another Compassionate Liberal

Sandra Bernhard, the outspoken (and often unfunny) comedian has launched a new one-woman show called “Without You I’m Nothing”. Here's a snippet of a review of her performance in the Washington Examiner by a writer named Barbara Mackay:

In Sandra Bernhard’s new show, “Without You I’m Nothing” at Theater J, she kvetches continually, whether she’s sneering at vacuous celebrity-speak from a fashion magazine, mocking mediocre singers or voicing contempt for Sarah Palin.

But in the end, oddly and subtly, Bernhard’s message is positive.

Interesting, because Ms. Mackay fails to mention that this is part of her show:

Sandra warns Sarah Palin not to come into Manhattan lest she get gang-raped by some of Sandra’s big black brothers.

"Gang rape" is a positive message? Just hilarious what passes for humor in the minds of hate-filled liberals these days. Perhaps the biggest joke of all is that they keep on insisting that we refer to them as "progressives".

---

Update: Michelle Malkin has further details. Here in Canada we have "human rights" commissions that monitor supposed hate speech, though everyone knows that said speech must come from a so-called conservative or it's ignored. So Bernhard would be found innocent by their standards.

However, in this case it could be argued that she is inciting violence against a specific person, namely Sarah Palin. In such a case, she could be prosecuted in a real court under Canada's federal hate speech legislation. Ezra Levant is on vacation right now but it would be most interesting to get his opinion on this when he returns!

A Perfect Example of Pro-Obama Media Bias

Take a close look at this story:


Do you notice something strange about the headline and about the way it's written? It completely misleads the casual reader, trying to imply that a top McCain aide thinks that he and Palin are the primary ones in this election unsuitable to run a corporation.

That's not what she said. She succinctly stated that neither of the 4 top contenders - Obama, McCain, Biden, & Palin - have the experience and background to run a major corporation. That's definitely the case WITH ALL FOUR OF THEM, so why try to say something quite different in a N-E-W-S story?

No media bias? Give me a break!!!

---

Of the four of them, Sarah Palin clearly has the most executive experience. But no mention of that of course.

---

Update: Dennis Prager expands upon my exact thoughts (a day later) here @ 16:40.

Eve Ensler - The Heather Mallick of the U.S.

If you'd like to see how deeply PDS has infected some, read this hate-filled diatribe by Eve Ensler. Seems to be reminiscent of her fellow deranged Canadian cousin, Heather Mallick.

Let me respond directly to some of the things she wrote:

I don't like raging at women. I am a Feminist and have spent my life trying to build community, help empower women and stop violence against them. It is hard to write about Sarah Palin. This is why the Sarah Palin choice was all the more insidious and cynical. The people who made this choice count on the goodness and solidarity of Feminists.
You claim to not like raging at women but then go on to spew more venom than even a King Cobra snake (or Queen Cobra if you prefer). You allude to the "goodness and solidarity of Feminists" before illustrating that there is no "goodness" in your hate piece whatsoever. The only solidarity that you & your ilk have is how much vile bile you can spew out at Sarah Palin and by extension any Americans who disagree with your narrow world view.


But everything Sarah Palin believes in and practices is antithetical to Feminism which for me is part of one story -- connected to saving the earth, ending racism, empowering women, giving young girls options, opening our minds, deepening tolerance, and ending violence and war.
You really mean "antithetical to Radical Leftist Feminism" but are too disingenuous to admit it. Sarah Palin is very much a feminist. Furthermore, using your own words, let's look at what you're really saying about Palin: She is trying to destroy the earth, in support of racism, disenfranchising women, giving young girls no options, closing the minds of fellow women, encouraging intolerance, and promoting violence and war.

Do you know the meaning of the phrase, "deep irony"? You're charging a woman who is running for vice-president of the United States of America as disenfranchising women and giving young girls no options? Even one of your gal pals, Judith Warner, has realized how incredibly incorrect your assertion is. Do you even realize, Ms. Ensler, that if you said this about a regular person that you'd be found guilty on multiple counts of libel?!? Indeed, "truth" is a defense, but you're not speaking on the side of truth.


I believe that the McCain/Palin ticket is one of the most dangerous choices of my lifetime, and should this country chose those candidates the fall-out may be so great, the destruction so vast in so many areas that America may never recover.
Such insane rhetoric has just guaranteed McCain-Palin more votes. Many more votes!


Sarah Palin does not much believe in thinking. From what I gather she has tried to ban books from the library, has a tendency to dispense with people who think independently.
No Ms. Ensler, YOU do not believe in independent thinking. She did not try to ban books from the library, no matter how many times you wish to repeat this lie. When it comes to asserting that someone else does not believe in thinking, 3 words come to mind: Pot, Kettle, Black.


Sarah believes in guns. She has her own custom Austrian hunting rifle. She has been known to kill 40 caribou at a clip. She has shot hundreds of wolves from the air.
Do you actually understand that your liberal elitist view that no American should be allowed to go hunting only exists amongst a radical minority in America? Your comment about her shooting wolves from the air is a LIE. The Alaskan Aerial Predator program was enacted to cull the wolf population (and bears in some areas) so as to expand the numbers of moose and caribou. Are you a moose-ist and caribou-ist, Ms Ensler? As for Sarah Palin killing "40 caribou at a clip", can we see the proof please?! Or did this vision of her only occur in your dreams? Ancillary question: Do you eat meat?


Sarah believes in God. That is of course her right, her private right.

But you don't like very much that she believes in God, do you Ms. Ensler? It's pretty scary for you that she does, isn't it?! Quick question: How come Barack Obama's Christian beliefs have never been a source of controversy?


Toward the end of her piece she epouses this great piece of wisdom:

If the Polar Bears don't move you to go and do everything in your power to get Obama elected then consider the chant that filled the hall after Palin spoke at the RNC, "Drill Drill Drill." I think of teeth when I think of drills. I think of rape. I think of destruction. I think of domination. I think of military exercises that force mindless repetition, emptying the brain of analysis, doubt, ambiguity or dissent. I think of pain.
I'm too busy shaking my head to say much. I guess being a former mining engineer makes me a rapist. At least in your tiny, extremely radical left-wing mind.

PDS Alert: Randi Rhodes

In the latest episode of Palin Derangement Syndrome, we have liberal media superstar, Randi Rhodes smearing the Republican VP nominee in the strangest of ways:

Victor Davis Hanson: Palin uproar reveals ugly side of today's feminism

Victor David Hanson is one of the best writers of our time. Period. In this article he describes why so-called feminists have shown themselves to be nothing other than phoneys and hypocrites in the past two weeks.

Here's the opening paragraph:

The media went hysterical over Sarah Palin, governor of Alaska and Republican nominee for vice president. She may have appeared to the public as an independent, capable professional woman, but to a particular elite she couldn't possibly be a real feminist or even a serious candidate. And that raises questions about what is — and what is not — feminism.

Another Day, Another Smear

Read the first sentence in this Time article:

"Sarah Palin thinks she is a better American than you because she comes from a small town, and a superior human being because she isn't a journalist and never lived in Washington and likes to watch her kids play hockey."

Does the author, Michael Kinsley, think that we're all morons? Clearly Sarah Palin doesn't think this way or act this way.

But let me say this: "Mr. Kinsley, I know I'm a better person than you because I don't write pathetic articles pretending to be real journalism but that end up sounding like a 7-year old boy throwing a temper tantrum. Grow a pair and be a mensch!!"

One has to wonder if historians will view 2008 as the year that the liberal media and the liberal blogosphere became indistinguishable. Professional journalism has definitely died.