Thursday, March 31, 2011

Whose a Liberal Outlet? You're a Liberal Outlet

Just in case you were wondering if Yahoo! News was a liberal news organization take a look at these headlines from this AM

Headline #1
OK, where to get started with this one. Let’s take a look at “target”.  Isn’t this word inflammatory and will cause people to go on a shooting spree? How many times did the liberal press point out that Sarah Palin’s target map was the root of all evil? I guess it is OK for Yahoo! News to use the word target and use it a way that makes it seem like being aimed at.

Now we’ll look at “antiabortion”. When you are a liberal and want to make the pro-life folks look a little less human, you use the term antiabortion. Throw antiabortion with the word crowd and you have unruly mob or “group with nefarious intent”.

The article itself is not very well balanced, unless of course, you are a liberal. It is written by Michelle Goldberg who wrote the book “Kingdom Coming: The Rise of Christian Nationalism”, and has written for Glamour, Rolling Stone, The Guardian (UK) and other liberal news outlets.

Here are a couple of excerpts from the article:

The antiabortion movement has been trying to reach out to African Americans for a long time by tarring modern family planning with the shameful legacy of eugenics.
The Christian right, after all, is rooted in a backlash against the civil-rights movement—Jerry Falwell, for one, used to preach that the end of segregation would lead to the destruction of the white race.  And the modern GOP, which anathematizes our president as a thuggish Kenyan socialist, doesn’t have a lot of credibility when it professes to worry about the future of black leadership.  That’s why front groups are necessary.

First of all, not all of us in the GOP believe Obama was born in Kenya.  In fact, it is a rather small group within the conservative movement.  To tar the whole GOP with the label “birther” is just plain wrong. When you write things like that, no wonder the black population, who are socially conservative (as the writer points out), shuns the GOP.

I’ll give credit where it is due. Goldberg does mention that the origins of Planned Parenthood are rooted in Margaret Sanger’s eugenics plans.  But then she goes on to mention Jerry Falwell and his preaching from years ago.  Why doesn’t she say this was part of the Christian right’s shameful legacy?  I have been a conservative for a VERY long time and I really don’t recall the folks I hung out with as being against black people. But if the writer wants to bring up civil rights, I should remind her that it was the democrat party that opposed the original legislation way back when.

The second excerpt:

There is no reason to think that Follett, Huckabee, and Palin are anything but sincere in their opposition to abortion.  Whether they’re sincere in their deep concern for African Americans and their fears for the loss of the next Obama is another question entirely.

This is just pitiful. No other way to describe it. Someone has to show some concerns for the rate of abortions in the black community.  After all, in 2008, 30 percent of the 1.21 million abortions performed in the US were on non-Hispanic black women, according to the Guttmacher Institute. During the same year, the US Census Bureau reported 13.5 percent of the US population was black. (Source: Baptist Press). The liberals certainly don’t seem to be concerned with the rate of abortions in the black community.

Headline #2

While the article itself has some merit, and I am a Palin supporter, just that fact this is news worthy points out why Palin is concerned about the press.  The article makes its own case why Palin takes issue with the way the press covers her. There was no balance what-so-ever. No mention was made the way the liberal media attacked her after the Tucson shootings, no mention was made that several reporters tried to convince us that Palin’s youngest child was actually the child of her oldest daughter, Bristol.  Then they go on to further attack Palin and here supporters with this:

At Salon, Alex Pareene say the episode offers a nice lesson in modern press relations.  “Palin made the (Daily) Caller jump through a ridiculous hoop to even obtain her self serving statement, which it used to provide balance to what had been printed elsewhere as a negative, anti Palin-story, and its reward for jumping through that hoop was that she declared war.  She is a very classy individual.”  On the other hand, Pareene jokes, “Her complaint does have some merit.  If Sarah Palin is too stupid to click on the button that sends you to the second page of an article, she can’t possibly expect her admirers to figure it out.”

I sure hope the liberal press does not question why there is so much animosity in this country.  But just in case they are scratching their heads and saying to themselves “I can’t understand why the conservative movement hates me some much. After all, I am smarter then they are. They should like me for that reason only”, the last line should be a primer at all journalism schools.  When you call millions of people stupid, you are going to create rift.  There liberal press, see how easy that was.

No comments:

Post a Comment