Blog @ MoreWhat.com

The mainstream media has fallen on hard times. You may recall it being the subject of another list of targets to ‘bailout’ as Washington politicians continue to spend money we don’t have. But it is understandable they would not want the only collective voice supporting their nonsense to disappear. How else would they be able to quote writers as their only argument in favor of that which is largely opposed?

This post is inspired by a random survey of articles in the first week of this year and has been hanging around in a bookmark file for some time. It had come to the decision point of write about it or delete it. And with a post here on the idea of using sources with no names entitled ‘Under Condition of Anonymity’ writing about it seems fitting.

The article from the LAT by James Rainey, ‘Freelance writing’s unfortunate new model’, did its job of drawing a reader’s attention. From that point it is anyone’s guess if that condition remains. His lament that tough times for the mainstream media translate into tough times for writers, freelance or otherwise, seems obvious. Talk about a case for trickle down economics. If the business supporting incomes for individuals encounters some degree of failure how are they to continue as before? If the business loses money so will those depending on it for an income. This ain’t rocket science.

After noting less than impressive opportunities for freelancers Rainey expresses the real reason this article stayed in the bookmark file this long.

What’s sailing away, a decade into the 21st century, is the common conception that writing is a profession — or at least a skilled craft that should come not only with psychic rewards but with something resembling a living wage.

Why? Where is it written that a skill you may have should provide a living wage? It is not necessarily true that if you build it they will come. And it follows that they may not be willing to pay for it. The problem may be the result of the audience or market realizing the product or service is not what it once was and are no longer as interested in paying for the privilege of using it.

Rainey suggests compensation for writing may have hit bottom. And he adds that little attention has been given to it ‘outside the trade.’ Is he aware that there has been a recession as well as troubling times for most economies around the world? His timeframe is a fair match for similar problems faced by just about everyone else. The economy stinks and money’s tight.

The last word for Rainey’s article (from here) suggests he may have it backwards. The quality and quantity of what passes for journalism in the mainstream media and elsewhere may be the real reason for hard times in the writing trade. An inability to deal effectively with a changing market and allowing public criticism of bias to be ignored may be the real cause.

As for what we will be missing if the trend he describes continues Mr Rainey might want to consider that ship has already sailed. Had journalism remained in the media hard times for the industry may have been avoided.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Where’s the leadership? Just glancing at a few current news reports demonstrates the world is sorely lacking a coherent strategy for anything, even if it is wrong. One Middle East saga almost as impotent as claiming to want peace in the region is the mass lethargy on Iranian nukes. Case in point provided by the following report.

Iran’s government said tonight that it saw a UN-brokered deal to export much of its enriched uranium “in a favourable light”, but asked for a few days’ extension of a UN deadline to make up its mind.

Enough already with the delaying tactics. Spare us the excuse that this is how diplomacy works. The perp in this story is the only player gaining an advantage. Whether it is a bunker buster bomb from the US or a surgical strike from Israel someone must confront Iran over nukes.

From a source with a leaning so far to the left it nearly falls off its flat earth mentality comes a post titled ‘Why Journalists Shouldn’t Be Defending Fox News.’ By virtue of the sentiment displayed by the title it is obvious HuffPo continues to express a selective view of the First Amendment. It only applies to liberals. That other MSM sources have opposed the White House exclusion of Fox News from planned interviews suggests HuffPo is clueless again or thinks you are.

What does that story have to do with leadership? The White House wastes time feuding with Fox News that would be better spent governing or at least trying to learn how. Taken a step further the left has an obsession with freedom of speech. The Fairness Doctrine, Net neutrality, FCC czars and other agenda items more suited to a Hugo Chavez or Fidel Castro style of government have no place in the United States.

There is certainly no shortage of examples demonstrating the lack of leadership related to the Democratic agenda to force healthcare reform on the American public.

Dems scrambling for support for public health plan

WASHINGTON — Democratic leaders in Congress scrambled Friday to round up votes for allowing the government to sell health insurance in competition with private industry as they struggled to finalize a health care bill that meets President Barack Obama’s goals.

In a change in the Senate, long seen as hostile to the so-called public option, senior Democrats were considering including such a measure, officials said. Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., spent Friday calling and talking with wavering Democrats to test support for different versions of the plan.

Based on polling over time and accepting the fact data could be flawed assume a fifty-fifty split on the issue. Any legislative proposal facing that much disagreement has a high probability of being bad public policy regardless of which side of the issue you favor. Rather than trying to force a mistake on the citizens of this country effective leadership would take a step back, table the debate and restart the process when reasonable solutions are presented.

The problem is widespread and nearly every critical issue today is plagued with special interest agendas. The political process, now more than anytime in the past, only serves to advance the self-serving pursuits of those who can manipulate the players. Real leadership would end this charade.

Barack Obama, Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi have done nothing to produce hope and change, a new direction for America or an end to the culture of corruption. The opposition party who lost the majority from similar failures has no current standing either. Whoever develops real leadership as described earlier in this post will be the beneficiaries in the election cycles of 2010 and 2012. Can we survive long enough to witness the result of that prediction?

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Terrorists Among Us (Right Truth)

Iran Has Nukes (Woman Honor Thyself)

Bill Ayers admits writing ‘Dreams’ to conservative blogger (Maggie’s Notebook)

The Witch Doctor (third world county)

Southern Border Status (Patterico’s Pontifications)

ABC News: U.S. Preparing to Bomb Iran (Flopping Aces)

Has General Petraeus taken a back seat in the Obama war room? (Sister Toldjah)

The year of living eco-sanctimoniously (Michelle Malkin)

Green Apples and Environmental Hypocrisy (Moonbattery)

Allies in Anbar Province Feel Abandoned by U.S. (Amy Proctor, Bottom Line Up Front)

Although a favorite target of liberals is former President George W. Bush liberals have their own presidential problems. Now Bill Clinton has reentered the political discussion and if memory serves was given some sort of BS envoy job by Obama. Not less BS than the job given to the former First Lady HRC. Both of the Clinton’s have meaningless posts in the Obama Administration but apparently feel the need to ‘back’ the Messiah anyhow. And there’s Jimmy Carter who did no favors for the current Admin.

Yet the libs continue their worn out GOP bashing amid all the clamor their impotent party and fringe supporters create. Fringe components like nutroots, MoveOn and the Soros gang bashed Cheney, Rumsfeld, Patraeus and US troops with their antiwar sentiment leading up to the 2008 election. Obama began with campaign rhetoric convincing supporters the US would immediately withdraw from Iraq and Afghanistan and punish everyone in the Bush Administration.

The fringe and not so fringe left want government everything from bailouts to stimulus to free healthcare as well as shamnesty for illegals, same sex marriage, abortion paid by tax dollars and more expense to the American public through AGW, cap and tax and a crushing debt exacerbated by President Obama and tax cheat Tim Geithner.

Congress is still muddled in Obamacare and cannot turn this sow’s ear into a silk purse. Okay, there’s not enough lipstick on the planet to accommodate this pig. Dems don’t appear to have the strength to finish Iraq or Afghanistan as required, fail to handle problems like Iran and North Korea properly and hand the Russians a gift by abandoning allies in Europe with an another appeasement missile defense plan.

As indicated by all the tax cheat nominations and withdrawals, plus the ACORN connection and shady resumes of most of the Messiah’s chosen few Michelle Malkin is not the least off the mark emphasizing the Culture of Corruption and placing it squarely on the liberal majority in Washington. The GOP had their fall from grace and lost the majority in the last two elections. It is now the Dems turn and they have wasted no time promoting a ‘throw the bums out’ option for voters in 2010.

Elections have consequences. Democrats wanted to be the majority and got their chance. Their ability to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory is once again being confirmed. It is way past time to point fingers and blame those who were previously the majority.

To the Democratic Party:

You wanted the job, you got it. Now govern properly and abandon your insane agenda or pay the price next year.

Complete the jobs in Iraq and Afghanistan. Abandon your present course on healthcare. Reduce spending and increase tax cuts. Stop the bailouts and porkulus madness. Forget cap and tax. Give up shamnesty and improve national security and defense. Follow the rule of law and the founding documents. Correct the other items mentioned above.

Once you get that completed come back here for the next task list.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

H/T to Pirate’s Cove for the following information…….

White House Quietly Admits Joe Wilson Was Correct. Wait, What?

In the wee hours of Friday night, at the end of a long Friday, the rememberence of September 11th, and going into a weekend of protests – from which Obama did his best Holy Grail impersonation – the White House made a very quiet hush hush admission

The bullet points sent tonight by the White House:

* Undocumented immigrants would not be able to buy private insurance on the exchange. Those who are lawfully present in this country would be able to participate.

* Undocumented immigrants would be able to buy insurance in the non-exchange private market, just as they do today. That market will shrink as the exchange takes hold, but it will still exist and will be subject to reforms such as the bans on pre-existing conditions and caps.

* Verification will be required when purchasing health insurance on the exchange. One option is the SAVE program (Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements) which states currently use to make sure that undocumented immigrants don’t participate in safety-net programs for which they are ineligible.

* There would be no change in the law that requires emergency rooms to treat people who need emergency care, including undocumented immigrants. There is already a federal grant program that compensates states for emergency room costs associated with treatment of undocumented immigrants, a provision sponsored by a Republican lawmaker.

source:
WH ON HEALTH CARE, ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS

The healthcare issue should be the last chance for politicians. No matter what happens from this point forward honest reform cannot be achieved with the current Administration and the 111th Congress. If this legislative nightmare is not abandoned everyone who votes in favor of it should be voted out of office at the next opportunity. Until public affairs in Washington, DC can be dealt with in an honest and effective manner based on founding principles the culture of corruption will continue and no good will come of it. As voters, no matter how painful, the only option available is to throw the bums out.and continue to do so until integrity is reintroduced to the process.

Honest government will not exist until those seeking public office are convinced dishonest behavior will end their careers. And the only way to do that is by examples in bulk. Democrat, Republican, Independent, it doesn’t matter. If they vote for healthcare reform in the current session throw the bums out.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

There have been posts on this blog related to questions raised about Barack Obama’s citizenship. The reason they were published comes from the fact the question raised has implications larger than the focus on the individual. Yes, Barack Obama’s citizenship was questioned. The birth certificate was also questioned. The story grew legs. Left, right, MSM, blogosphere, etc.,etc., paid attention to the story but not the question. One article from VOA News was posted on the news site here, pointing more accurately to the real issue. The issue in posts on this blog were intentionally left vague expecting some reader to notice. It will remain that way to see if anyone picks up on it.

Does featuring blog posts about Barack Obama’s citizenship or birth certificate render this blog’s author a ‘birther’? If it does that would be disappointing.

Whether or not a person is ‘eligible’ to hold the office of President of the United States is not an insignificant question. That some posts here followed the attempt of Philip Berg and his pursuit of the answer in the case of Barack Obama raised a question beyond the specifics of the ‘birther’ thing. If memory serves, his ‘petition’ to the Supreme Court or perhaps a lower court was rejected as he was adjudged to have ‘no standing’ in the matter. How that opinion was arrived at posed a compelling concern about law and how it works in general. It still does. But it does not seem to draw noticeable attention.

There has been some talk these days of conservative rebirth after a GOP fall from grace. Not surprisingly focus has led to questions about ‘fringe’ right wing elements and their effect on the conservative base, movement, whatever. Birther concerns on the right have drawn as much focus as truther concerns from the left. That is what leads into what is presented here now.

By chance this blogger was browsing the site, Little Green Footballs, and was drawn to an item where someone challenged the value of content produced by World Net Daily. Concerns of ‘fringe’ right wing philosophy and covering stories like the ‘birther’ thing or more specifically a comparison between Nazi detention facilities and the Obama Administration were discussed. There is a link entitled ‘Organizing Against WorldNetDaily.’ that points to another interesting piece.

There is some background for why this story is of interest here. Some time back the question of World Net Daily and the site’s usefulness as a blog link came up. This blog’s author mentioned to another in an email they might want to rethink linking to World Net Daily. The concerns were expressed and after some time the other blogger concurred. The concern was one’s blog may get painted as ‘whacko’ by offering a link or promoting WND. This determination was not a casual dismissal. Considerable research went into arriving at the conclusion. So now, years later, an issue on the relevance of WND is raised.

But the way it is raised is nearly as troubling as the conclusion drawn in the explanation indicated above. If this blog posted a conspiracy theory each day with or without explanation no surprise would be expressed if everyone viewed it as ‘fringe’. But what is more troubling than all of this comes from those describing themselves as conservative having positions or reactions viewed as a result of this topic.

Here is a list of posts at Next Right on this topic:

Jon Henke: Fighting for the Right, the World Net Daily Story

Patrick Ruffini: Can We Have Buckley Back?

Jon Henke: The RNC Responds But Will Not Distance Themselves

Jon Henke: World Net Daily Responds

Jon Henke: Organizing Against World Net Daily

You get to the promised land by having a process that places everything on the table. After much analysis and debate items are chosen as worthy. Then the conclusions are tested in the real world. What works is successful and what does not is abandoned. Trying to define that which is conservative before the process is able to separate the wheat from the chaff is counterproductive. Granted, the reality of politics suggests some honest public debate on issues may put outcomes at risk. But if free and open debate is stifled no matter where it comes from or what is says, conservative principles are undermined.

Some choose to follow World Net Daily, some do not. To raise an issue on whether or not a group should denounce them, etc., is not good policy.

This has the added benefit of this blog not being referred to as a ‘birther’ simply for publishing posts about Obama’s citizenship credentials.

And WND is still not recommended here. But then they shouldn’t be banned either.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Upbeat Conservative News, Dems in Trouble Everywhere

Upbeat Conservative News, Obama’s Foreign Policy Slips

Upbeat Conservative News, Clueless President

Upbeat Conservative News, Abortion Advocates Losing

Upbeat Conservative News, Most Oppose Obamacare

Upbeat Conservative News, Tapper on Obama Freefall

Upbeat Conservative News, Obama Hurting Liberals

Upbeat Conservative News, Congress Still Tanking

Upbeat Conservative News, Obama Loses Independents

Upbeat Conservative News, Obama Plunges

It frequently happens and did again today. For reasons escaping this blog’s understanding, except that the net produces unexpected events, a couple of items here have garnered unqualified traffic.

A previous post on a Sean Hannity and Friends Video, Radicalism in America has received a boatload of traffic yesterday (August 10, 2009). The trend continues today. While I don’t spend much time trying to determine cause and effect on these anomalies suffice it to say it brings some pleasure. Not for the traffic but the public interest in the topic.

The other anomaly for these days concerns traffic on the category ‘Gabrielle Giffords’. From a news search it appears she fears for her life at August recess town halls and has her crew trying to sustain the idea that all opposition to POLS at these events are contrived and paid for by the political opposition. Ya, sure Gabby, we all believe that.

Funny since mentioning this blog’s form email requests at www.whitehouse.gov and the staggering number of replies only received since Obamacare began to tank that trend has stopped since the hashtag stories hit the net. So Gabby, tell me, am I now on the Obama enemies list?

Sure, it is reasonable to assume some attendees at the recess town halls are part of an organized effort to oppose Obamacare, etc., etc. But not ALL of them. For Dems by party and liberals in general to discount the public outrage over politics in DC one has to subject themselves to a lobotomy.

For the current administration and Congress to draw this much heat from public opposition to their various agendas only serves to renew one’s faith that the American public will only take so much crap before there’s a price to pay. Can’t wait for the 2010 elections.

Short ‘my thoughts’ edition as I have some 12 year old, single malt, Glenlivet to inspect. We wouldn’t want to neglect due diligence on products imported to the good ‘ol US of A. Gotta help the feddle gubmint out from time to time. And I am seriously qualified at this sort of thing.
Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

It surely has nothing to do with an email sent from this blogger to Michelle Malkin but she gets my thanks anyhow.  A while back I requested that she use her awesome blogging power to draw attention to the never ending threat of shamnesty.  This week it happened.

To Michelle Malkin: Thank you.  Respectfully, Stanford Matthews from Blog @ Morewhat.com

Caution: Lindsay Grahamnesty at work; Update: Obama says wait until next year 

It is possible that my personal opinion has found its way into blog posts here and elsewhere. One statement that comes to mind is ‘everyone is entitled to my opinion’. Sorry, I thought it was funny. And that’s the point of this post, my thoughts.

There are no graphics supplied. There is no prelude or argument supplied to make the case that my thoughts matter. And for three years now (the past week marks the third year of MoreWhat.com and in all that time I have regularly resisted the temptation to soap box and failed infrequently) personal rants rarely found there way on to the pages of this blog or the forum. Okay, I lied, the forum part is what that’s all about, so there.

A couple of other posts have ventured into this risky domain. But count this one as the first since babble like this will be more frequent for the forseeable future. After all, that was the original intention of the blog format. You know, my weblog. And that is exactly the reason why I avoid talking in first person and ‘infrequently’ rant in a personal style.

So here is the first one. This may explain a few things to readers who come by more than once in a year or so or only after their monthly checkup cuz day haz a new sig other. The initial reason for starting this site centered on a public affairs mission and as the caption under the blog name indicates ‘to build consensus on issues’. The hope was actually to build a community of independent thinkers who could find common ground within the issues of the day.

BUT YOU LOSERS ARE TOO INVOLVED IN YOUR TWITTING, FACEBOOKIN’ AND WHATEVER TO PULL YOUR COLLECTIVE HEADS OUTTA YOUR ASS LONG ENOUGH TO CARE!!!

How’s that for an impromtu rant? And there’s the fact that the original group who was formed for this purpose went the way of other in love with tech but no sense wannabes and flew the coop. And I was to honest and naive to attach myself to the typical strategies for building a site that works in the typical fashion of today.

Sort of like a sports purist or other holdout who expresses take on important matters only to be lost in the sea of competing interests. That may change or actually will but that is fodder for another post on this topic later. Ooh, ooh, piqued your interest? Not a chance.

So as babble goes, here’s the next part. On the consensus and public affairs slant, like everyone else I have opinions. But the idea was to talk about things that seemed no brainers for mass appeal and a place for agreement. Oh sure, there are those who agree and sometimes even comment on the posts. But that’s it! With the exception of one ‘net buddy’ who shall remain anonymous the rest of you have either missed my points, many of them, or are more content to continue as before and accept the way it is.

The issues and topics that should be of concern to everyone and understanding that even with all the distractions on one’s time there should be enough left to deal with items which really do affect your lives, few seem willing to much more than talk.

In politics and public affairs power brokers, POLS and similar entities dominate the landscape. Grassroots is code for liberals joining commie org’s. And everyone else if they get involved feels content to allow political parties or other special interest to call the plays for them.

Outfits that belonged to H Ross Perot in the past or Ron Paul lately have been the only established personalities who have promoted an independent shall I say, third party, to make a move. And what happened? NOTHING!!!!

It seems reasonable that to be genuinely defined as ‘independent’ a large group, to be effective, raise money and compete needs to come from those who cannot be impeached for connections to existing players. But getting the general public to sign on in an informal or casual way bears no fruit. That’s not to say the LGBT crowd wouldn’t hop on board but that is just a cheap shot at a constituency this blog does not favor. And it was time for a little humor to break up the rant.

Hell, I’d even consider a joint venture with the LGBT if they were not so set in their ways. We’re queer and we’re here, get used to it is not a slogan I find particularly compelling for building consensus. It is just another special interest.

Posts here in the past, inspired by posts by Perri Nelson and the ICS civics literacy quiz suggest a central theme on this blog. America being America and returning to the founding fathers, their documents and continuing to build on the wisdom which built this great country.

Without that the rest is a moot point.

That’s it for this Sunday’s first installation of MoreWhat Matters: That’s right, my thoughts.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

BTW, those attending August recess townhalls and being characterized as paid rabble rousers from the right should contest the notion by sharing their stories on lack of connection to special interest. That would help to quell the liberal rant to the contrary.

‘Pandering to diversity’ by using cronyism and the old boy network of the Chicago political machine and at the same time claiming hope and change from the culture of corruption.

Those voting for Barack Obama in 2008 were either duped by the campaign promoted by the MSM or eager to share in the spoils of a fraud that is national in scope and international in the danger it represents.

Michelle Malkin is again knocking one outta the park.

See her interview with Matt Lauer. It IS spectacular.

Thanks to michellemalkin.com, Hot Air and CSPAN for the vids, etc.

Saturday open thread

Watch ABC’s This Week with Snuffalupagas as Malkin will be on the panel. Outstanding!!

And for those who would like to charge that Malkin is merely hawking her new book with all this. This is one example of a win/win. Good for her and good for everyone else.

This report can lift your spirits for the entire weekend or more. (Three cheers for MM)

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

from Maggie’s Notebook……. you don’t want to miss this one.
Incisive Article by Thomas Sowell

from Conservative Thoughts….. more surprises from healthcare reform proposals

HR 3200 Not for English Speaking Americans pg 400

from Right Truth…… race talk and it’s not NASCAR

Racing to the Race Card: An Observation of Conflict Building

from Perri Nelson….. can you ever agree with Barack Obama?

Even a stopped clock…

from Third World County…… and we wonder why reform is a messy business

Krugman pwn3d on Healthcare “Reform”

from Woman Honor Thyself…… not the kind of story you might think

Beluga Whale saves drowning Diver

The posts above are truly good reads. Tired of the same old MSM? You should be ! Do yourself a favor and check out the list above.

Recommended by none other than Blog @ MoreWhat.com If you want more what you know where to find it.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

The previous post featured another liberal being paid to give her take on the news at a well-known media outlet. Let not the criticism be placed solely on liberal taking heads. While there is a considerable quantity of worthwhile writing coming from the Wall Street Journal, Peggy Noonan is not responsible for any of it. How does that square with the fact she is a contributing editor at the WSJ? Maybe it is just another example that nothing has to make sense in the media world.

Noonan is considered by some to be a conservative. Why? Just because she was a speech writer for Ronald Reagan. Dick Morris was in the Clinton clan. Does that make him a liberal? Not necessarily but he fits well with Noonan as not being particularly useful as a media voice. How about David Brooks? Sitting with liberal Mark Shields on the News Hour with Jim Lehrer from PBS you might expect a sort of point counterpoint arrangement of the left and right. A description of Brooks on Wikipedia suggests a claim from Brooks that he was ‘originally a liberal’ yet Wiki states he is a ’staunch conservative.’ If position statements on Wiki are accurate about Brooks there is little doubt he still maintains a liberal viewpoint.

Rush Limbaugh makes a boat load of money with his radio talk show. Does that prove anything about Mr Limbaugh. Certainly it does. Whether you are on the left or right or nowhere at all it is a simple matter to conclude that whatever your opinion of Rush Limbaugh he attracts a large enough audience to command stellar compensation for his efforts. With a reported contract of $400 million for eight years one can assume many people in this country agree with what he has to say. Something the left side of politics has been unable to produce.

What is the difference between someone like Rush Limbaugh and the others mentioned in this post? Aside from the occasional broadcast appearance of the others they are largely print media people and Limbaugh is primarily in broadcast. The real difference is that Limbaugh is marketable on his own having little influence over his programming by those who sign the checks. The same cannot be said of the others. Their loyalties and the influence over them by those who sign the paychecks can easily influence their opinions as expressed under the byline.

Whether Limbaugh simply knows how to work the best paying crowd or has won a massive audience and payday by preaching to the choir does not matter. He is either striking a resonant chord with like-minded individuals or cheer leading for those who already know most of what he says is true. If you think you found a flaw in that statement you would be wrong. If what Rush says is not true it is generally preceded with hints to indicate that and if you miss the cues altogether you haven’t listened to his program long enough.

By now the average liberal should have drawn a conclusion that this is merely another pitch for Rush Limbaugh. Nope. Wrong again. Since these days even the liberals are contributing to the popularity of Rush Limbaugh and other conservative messengers it saves typing to select an example with which everyone is familiar. Simply by virtue of the liberal response to conservative media people like Limbaugh, Hannity, Levin, Beck and others it would be difficult to get a substantial number of people to describe them as liberals. The same cannot be said of the previously mentioned print media people in either direction.

By Limbaugh’s often heard statement equating the voting distinction of ‘independent’ as nothing more than a liberal this blog’s author is, go figure, a liberal. That is not the case. Is Limbaugh not telling the truth? Not exactly. His understanding of the term independent as used in politics is different than the one on this blog. Here is is used to define a voter or politician with no political affiliation. Apparently Limbaugh sees it as a mask for closet liberals to hide behind.

It is not uncommon for those in the GOP to get labeled RINO (Republican In Name Only) due to either not supporting the GOP or acting counter to conservative principles. Even without the recent party move by Specter the Defector the entire GOP could be labeled RINO after their fall from grace from conservative principles like fiscal responsibility. But can you ever remember a Democrat being called a DINO (Democrat In Name Only)? Hence it would be understandable if Rush found all those interested in politics or public affairs to be left or right, Democrat or Republican, liberal or conservative with nothing in between. Or in other words, if independent was not available and you had to pick one side or the other of the pairs just listed, what would it be?

In closing, to find reasonable information or commentary about current events is no less difficult now then it ever has been in years past. Just because technology has increased the number of offerings to choose from does not make the choices any easier. If anything it has made it more challenging since anyone can become a voice. So in this case rather than making life easier technological advancements have made the mission of being well-informed a labor-intensive task.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Found this site on a post at Michelle Malkin’s blog.  You gotta love it.  Pix from a Chicago Tea Party pretty much say it all.  Check it out!!

Founding Bloggers (click here) 

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

If you recall use of the phrase ‘Manchurian candidate’ in current American politics you may be old enough to remember watching the 1962 film. But you may be a little foggy on the details after many years if you actually went to a theatre to view it in the sixties.

That was the initial reason for this post along with its current use in politics and the search began. After one pass in the Google main search engine page the phrase was entered in the news search. The first result featured an LA Times review of the movie apparently being shown at a local venue. The paper mentions Richard Condon as author of the book by of course the same name and its 1959 debut. Since the phrase is getting some attention it seems only fair to give credit to the book’s author.

It was no big surprise that the second result put the phrase into current political context. An excerpt from a HuffPo item titled ‘Irresponsible Vitriol in the Media’ from April 1, 2009 indicates Bloomberg ‘asserting’ Obama is ‘giving us a war on business’ and ‘legislat[ing] like a Manchurian Candidate.’

That led to actually clicking on a result that read like a common liberal rant expressing discontent with ‘deranged comments on their blogs’ and ‘Manchurian candidate.’

TPM
my TPM BLOG
March 25, 2009, 2:46PM
acanuck

Jokes about Obama’s “dependence” on his teleprompter have been all over the right-wing media and blogosphere for months: Fox, Politico, Townhall, Drudge and now AP … the list is shockingly long. Google “obama teleprompter” and make your own. There’s even a link to yet another bogus teleprompter story on the TPM main page today.

Two things to be said about the item above. The minor distraction of referring to someone’s actions as ’stupider’ rather than ‘more stupid’ as a superior grammatical choice albeit no improvement in style. And including Politico in a set of sources described as right wing media and blogosphere. Fox, Townhall and Drudge could be rated as probably, certainly and perhaps, respectively and respectfully. But AP and Politico being right wing?

The TPM blog item led to the following.

Teleprompter Vs. No Teleprompter: Letterman Takes On Obama Critics (VIDEO)
Huffington Post - Alex Leo
March 24, 2009 11:13 AM

Critics say Obama relies too heavily on his teleprompter. As Politico notes:

“Obama’s reliance on the teleprompter is unusual — not only because he is famous for his oratory, but because no other president has used one so consistently and at so many events, large and small.”

They make an interesting point, why would a president want to be prepared and careful about what he says? The guy who had the job for the last eight years didn’t need no stinkin’ teleprompter!

This HuffPo piece offers a video along with their apparent agreement with the other item suggesting disdain over Politico. The video uses David Letterman and one of his comedy vids to support their argument to accept Obama’s dependence on a teleprompter as a good thing.

Nothing against Letterman but is that really the source you want to select to make a serious point? BTW, the vid is funny as it presents a ’serious’ Obama speaking in front of the camera versus a speaking gaffe by former President George W Bush. It’s also funny, but not in the humorous meaning, they don’t present a serious vid of Bush giving a prepared speech versus a speaking gaffe by Obama like dissin’ special olympics on a late night talk show when he was not likely using his favorite teleprompter. (and to liberals who will contest this, yes, Bush 43 gave plenty of serious speeches without gaffes)

Another contrast to offer is George Bush (43) even made self-deprecating remarks about his lack of public speaking prowess while the media, politicians and other observers have elevated Obama’s communication skills to the level of JFK. CBS News has a headline ‘Obama’s oratory grabbing the spotlight.’ The LA Times has ‘the power of Obama’s oratory.’ Two examples of the abundance of media love for everything Obama. So the left should understand if you are going to make a claim there will be challenges. You could equate Obama oratory by teleprompter to athletes using performance enhancing drugs to artificially improve their results.

This post was initially intended to present various arguments for the media being left wing or right wing and examples of how some draw their conclusions. While a bit of that was suggested the rest must wait for another post as the Obama yeah and Bush naw items along with silly responses to Manchurian candidates and teleprompters dominated this ’search’ journey.

But perhaps the central point to a left/right media analysis is suggested in results from a search engine inquiry using each of the following: ‘left wing politico’ and ‘right wing politico.’ On just one pass there are plenty of results to lean toward a conclusion that regardless of the political stripe of readers their reaction to whether a source is left or right is influenced by whether they agree or disagree with the source.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com