Published on Jul 26, 2014
הלוואי ועוד אנשים בעולם היו מבינים זאת!!!
Joan Rivers defends Israel
תרגום: דורון ס
” According to the START consortium at the University of Maryland, here is the threat from “far right” extremism in America:
- Between 1990 and 2013, there were 155 ideologically motivated homicide events committed by far-right extremists in the United States. About 13 percent of these were anti-government in nature.
- Including the Oklahoma City Bombing, which killed 168 individuals, far-right extremists killed 368 individuals during ideologically motivated homicide events between 1990 and 2013.
Even if we factor in the Oklahoma City bombing we are talking about 16 fatalities a year. In a nation of over 300 million people.
Let’s contextualize by showing the odds of being killed by other things in America that are not “far right” extremists with this Economist chart:
If the odds of dying in a given year for an American is about 20,000,000:1, then you are more likely to be killed by the following things than by “right-wing extremists”:
Heart disease, accidents and injuries, intentional self-harm, assault by firearms, walking, choking, fire, post-surgical complications, alcohol, falling down stairs, exposure to forces of nature, cycling, exposure to excessive natural cold, firearms discharge, storms, lightning, and dog bites.
Even if the Las Vegas shooters were right-wing “anti-government” types, we still need to know one basic fact: the number of deadly acts of “far-right” anti-government extremism is fewer than one a year over 23 years.
It is patently absurd to represent millions of Americans by extreme cases, and this type of false inductive reasoning is rejected in serious research. Nonetheless, the news media grab onto extreme cases and hold them up as representative of decent, hard-working Americans.
Getting killed by a far right extremist is about as likely to happen to an American as getting killed by a bee sting – which has odds of around 25,000,000:1. Maybe the Department of Justice and Department of Homeland Security should look into the threats posed by angry bees in the United States?
In addition, those who are gun control proponents make the claim that firearms are a threat to society, and base that claim in part on the statistic that there were 12,800 homicides in the United States
But they’re not looking at the over 100 million people who have access to guns. Each year, Americans with access to guns are around ten thousand times more likely not to unlawfully use a firearm than to use one to commit a homicide.
As far as right-wing “terrorism” goes, it barely registers a blip compared to eco-terrorism and Islamist terrorism. But the partisan media don’t want you to know that; they’d rather take extreme events out of context and use them to attack their political enemies.”
Speaking of using violence for political gain , we invite you to read our thorough debunking of Nanny Bloomberg’s Everytown “74 School Shootings” Map .
Many thanks to Kyle Becker for the above article .
” David Letterman shocked the late night talk show world, last week, when he announced he was going to retire in 2015. But over the last few years Letterman had been losing the ratings war to his less liberal competitor Jay Leno. While Leno tried to be more even-handed in his jokes against Republicans and Democrats, Letterman took a decidedly leftist turn. A recent study of Letterman’s 2012 campaign jokes found he took more shots at Mitt Romney (44) than Barack Obama (9).
In the 2000’s Letterman throttled Republicans like George W. Bush and Dick Cheney, questioning if they had any “humanity.” He also conducted his own personal war on GOP women as he called Michele Bachmann a “whacko” and depicted Sarah Palin and her daughter in “slutty” terms. But when it came to Obama, Letterman was positively awe-struck when the President came on his show, as he gushed “how satisfying it is to watch you work.” [Video compilation after the jump]
The following is a Top 10 List of David Letterman’s Most Liberal Outbursts:” See the rest here
” Imagine if a former Republican presidential candidate and U.S. senator had called a current Republican president a delusional liar whose programs are wasteful. Would the mainstream media not be all over the story? Such a person would be interviewed at length by Wolf Blitzer on CNN as well as made the rounds of the morning talk shows and the Sunday news programs as well. The media buzz would be red hot on this topic for days extending into weeks.
Well, there is such a person but because he is a Democrat saying these things about President Obama, we can expect him to become an MSM nonperson. Such seems to already be the fate of former presidential candidate and U.S. Senator Bob Kerrey. It is no surprise that his extended criticisms of Obama appeared in in a Daily Mail article in Britain, not in America where the shunning seems to have already begun. Here is what Kerrey has to say about Obama which you most likely won’t see in any major liberal news outlet in America:
The Nebraskan straight-talker told MailOnline in an exclusive interview that Obama isn’t up to the job of bringing liberals and conservatives to the table to rescue America’s slowly choking entitlement programs.
And Obama, he said Wednesday in his Manhattan office, knew full well he was lying when he promised that the Affordable Care Act would allow Americans to keep insurance plans they liked.
‘ He had to know he was misleading the audience,’ Kerrey said quietly, recalling the newly minted president’s countless promises as Congress and the public debated his signature health insurance overhaul.
‘ On the other hand, he may have said it so many times,’ he added, ‘that the spell-checker wasn’t in the room – the spell-checker, the fact-checker – somebody who says, “Excuse me, Mr. President, but I hope you know this…”‘
Obama’s infamous four-Pinocchio pledges, Kerrey explained, never stood a chance of being fulfilled because there were ‘a million people out there with policies that, for one reason or another, run short of the minimum standard. I mean, they bought something cheaper!’
Wow! Pretty strong stuff. But wait…there’s more! “
The bias of the liberal media knows no bounds . Even after they find themselves spied upon , threatened , denied access , and told they require government supervision they still lick his boots and refuse to point out the Emperor’s nakedness .
Uploaded on Jul 2, 2009
” A humorous musical look at the media’s love affair with Obama. Put your message/song to video. AFFORDABLE CUSTOM VIDEO PRODUCTIONS by JoeDanMedia.com BE SEEN & HEARD, (political ads, commercials, any multi-media)
For a current portfolio Click here:http://www.joedanmedia.com/Resume_of_…
To contact Joe Dan for YOUR project, click the CONTACT button at the top of JoeDanMedia.com http://www.joedanmedia.com/ “
” Look out: The libertarians are coming! The libertarians are coming! Never before have so many been so intimidated by so few, with so little political power.
Salon.com offers near-daily warnings about the libertarian “threat”:
- It’s corrupting progressivism: “Don’t ally with libertarians: Ideologues co-opt an anti-NSA rally.”
- It’s even infecting your iPhone apps: “The Secret Libertarianism of Uber and Airbnb.”
“ Beware of Libertarians Bearing Gifts,” the Center for American Progress admonishes: “a bipartisan move against the NSA could kill the New Deal.”
Anti-libertarian paranoia plagues our elected officials too: “the anarchists have taken over,” Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., wails. “This strain of libertarianism … is a very dangerous thought,” New Jersey Governor Chris Christie warned last summer in the wake of Edward Snowden‘s exposure of National Security Agency spying: “I want [these critics] to come to New Jersey and sit across from the widows and the orphans” (Pro tip: don’t take the George Washington Bridge).”
The Establishment is rightfully fearful of the burgeoning libertarian movement as it is the one political ideology to come along in our lifetimes that has the potential to triumph over the Statists that occupy both sides of the aisle .
The amount of contempt and derision displayed by the accustomed ruling class happens to be directly proportional to the degree of threat they perceive the libertarian tenets to pose to their entitled way of life .
This quote from the TribLive explains quite succinctly why the Ole Boys SHOULD fear Libertarians and their ideals :
” Hyperbole and ridicule aside, one thing is true — libertarians approach questions differently than do Democrats and Republicans. Where the major parties develop “platforms” of issues they support, libertarians begin with a single assumption with which most everyone can agree — all humans are free and equal in dignity by virtue of their being human. Everything else is commentary.
The reason for partisan scorn is that the two-party faithful do not grasp that libertarians don’t think in terms of issues. Libertarians think in terms of principles. They begin with the principles of freedom and equality and apply these timeless principles to the issues of the day. What emerges is an extraordinarily civil discourse. The civility arises because libertarians begin at a point of consensus, not a point of contention.”
They should be afraid … very afraid … Our time has returned . Read the rest at Reason .
” Republican strategists like to say the party’s next nominee needs to hail from the GOP’s gubernatorial ranks. It’s a response to how unpopular Washington is—particularly the party’s congressional wing—and a reflection of the party’s strength in holding a majority of governorships. But another reason for the gubernatorial focus is to sidestep the one formidable candidate that gives the establishment heartburn: Sen. Rand Paul.
Make no mistake: The Kentuckian scares the living daylights out of many Republicans looking for an electable nominee capable of challenging Hillary Clinton. At the same time, he’s working overtime to broaden the party’s image outside its traditional avenues of support. The 2016 Republican nominating fight will go a long way toward determining whether Paul is the modern version of Barry Goldwater or at the leading edge of a new, more libertarian brand of Republicanism.”
National Journal has a lengthy piece on the prospects of a Rand Paul candidacy and the fears said possibility is generating among the establishment GOP elite . Of course this is not the first “mainstream” media article to fan the flames of internecine struggle within the republican party and one can be sure that as 2016 approaches these types of hit pieces will become ever-more commonplace .
The MSM is nothing if not predictable in their unwavering efforts to cheerlead the democrats into office , any democrat any office , and they are as much aware of the old maxim “divide and conquer” as are you and I so we can pretty much count on this type of strategy right up to the nominating convention in the summer of 2015 .
That said , there remains the distinct possibility that the democrats and their media sidekicks fear a Paul candidacy even more than the GOP establishment . There is no denying the attraction of many of Sen Paul’s core beliefs among the voting youth of the nation and no one is doing more to reach out to minority voters as well . The libertarian ideals of “live and let live” have taken on new resonance in the age of “free healthcare” , trillion dollar bailouts and State surveillance .
The libertarian beliefs that Paul advances have grown significantly over the past 5 plus years of ever-encroaching Statism and more than a few Obama voters have seen the error of the Big Government ways . In the long run we who value liberty may well have cause to rejoice in the calamity that is the Obama administration as it has had the effect of cramming two generations worth of Statist creep into two voting cycles and thus turned a whole generation of voters off off from the government teat even as it bloats the dependency roles .
” Are schools and colleges dangerous places, with lots of gun violence?
Some groups paint a picture of these places being particularly unsafe. Supposedly both murders and firearm suicides are very common at educational institutions. Last Wednesday, former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s two groups, Moms Demand Gun Sense in America and Mayors Against Illegal Guns, jointly released a report that received massive , uncritical , news , coverage .
They claimed that 44 shootings occurred in schools and colleges nationwide since the Newtown, Conn. massacre on Dec. 14, 2012 and Feb. 10 of this year. Out of the 44 shootings, a total of 28 died. To dramatize their numbers, Bloomberg’s groups emphasized that one of these attacks occurred every 10 days.
But their statistics are not what they seem. Included in the numbers are suicides. Also included are late night shootings taking place in school parking lots, on their grounds or even off school property, often involving gangs. As “shootings,” they also include any incident where shots were fired, even when nobody was injured.”
To illustrate their biased point of view in pursuit of their anti-gun agenda they have grossly misrepresented what constitutes a “school shooting” along the very same lines they use when talking about the deaths of “children” from guns . Below are some of what Bloomberg considers “school shootings” …
” • A student at Eastern Florida State College retrieved his gun from his car when two men attacked him. One of the men was striking the student with a pool cue, and the student fired his gun wounding him. The gun was legally stored in the student’s car and the police found that he had acted in self-defense.
• A 19-year-old was killed at 9pm in a field near the Hillside Elementary School in San Leandro, California.
• A professor at the South Dakota School of Mines & Technology committed suicide in an empty classroom.
• A 23-year-old man committed suicide late at night on school grounds when no one was around the Algona High/Middle School in Iowa.
• A 38-year-old man was shot to death at 2am on the grounds of the Clarksville, Tennessee High School.
• A 19-year-old man committed suicide in the parking lot of a Portland, Maine high school. No one at the school was threatened.”
But even when the Statist media bends the statistics to suit their agenda they still cannot prove their contention that schools are becoming increasingly commonplace .
” Contrary to what many people believe, high school shootings have actually been falling over the last two decades . To illustrate this let’s compare the five school years 1992-93 to 1996-97 with the five school years from 2008-09 to 2012-13. During the first period, the number of non-gang, non-suicide shooting deaths averaged 25 a year. During the recent five-year period, it averaged less than half that, 10 per year – and that figure does include the horrific Newtown massacre.
It’s all about the narrative … truth doesn’t enter into it . The story continues at Fox News
” We reckon that anti-gunners will do just about anything to try to trick people into thinking that gun sales are tanking and that Americans therefore are ready to support the full array of restrictions envisioned by our “transform the United States of America” president, Barack Obama.
Yesterday, Bloomberg Businessweek featured an article by Kyle Stock that juggled monthly numbers of firearm-related checks conducted by the National Instant Criminal Background System (NICS) to make it appear that, as Stock put it, “Americans, apparently, may finally have enough guns and ammunition.” Stock explained, “FBI background checks, a leading indicator of firearm demand, have also been dropping. Federal applications to make a gun purchase last month were one-third fewer (sic) than a year ago.”
Today, CNN published a similar item. Titled “Gun Sales Are Plunging,” the article, by Aaron Smith, says “Background checks by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, considered the most accurate means of tracking gun sales, plunged by a third in January compared to the year before.” “
NRA has the story and as is the norm , the MSM’s data is skewed to push their agenda … no surprise there .
” Sports fans checking in on coverage of Team USA at the 2014 Winter Olympics in Sochi, Russia might want to brace themselves for unexpected outbursts of liberal preaching from reporters covering the games.
Over the years the MRC has documented lefty reporters and writers using the games to celebrate socialist policies, bash expressions of patriotism and even work in jabs against Republicans, like when Bryant Gumbel, in 2006, complained that the “paucity” of black athletes “makes the Winter Games look like a GOP convention.”
In the spirit of the games, the most outrageous journalists are competing with each other in three events for the Gold, Silver and Bronze medals. “
MRCTV has provided a great service by creating this article . It shows the reader how the Olympics has been used as a political soapbox by the media for years in their efforts to push their liberal , statist agenda . With clips from Lillehammer , Beijing , Athens , Salt Lake City , Sochi and more MRC examines the American media propensity to push the partisan progressive agenda even as they bemoan the politicization of the Olympics on the part of Americans in the form of an “excessive” nationalism .
Be sure to read the whole thing and watch all the videos .
” Media Bias 101 summarizes decades of survey research showing how journalists vote, what journalists think, what the public thinks about the media, and what journalists say about media bias. The following links take you to dozens of different surveys, with key findings and illustrative charts.
Part One: What Journalists Think
Surveys over the past 30 years have consistently found that journalists — especially those at the highest ranks of their profession — are much more liberal than rest of America. They are more likely to vote liberal, more likely to describe themselves as liberal, and more likely to agree with the liberal position on policy matters than members of the general public.
Part Two: How the Public Views the Media
A wide variety of public opinion polls have documented the fact that most Americans now see the media as politically biased, inaccurate, intrusive, and a tool of powerful interests. By a nearly three-to-one margin, those who see political bias believe the media bend their stories to favor liberals.
Part Three: What Journalists Say about Media Bias
Over the years, the Media Research Center has catalogued the views of journalists on the subject of bias. In spite of overwhelming evidence to the contrary, many journalists still refuse to acknowledge that most of the establishment media tilts to the left. Even so, a number of journalists have admitted that the majority of their brethren approach the news from a liberal angle. “
” The “post-partisan” president revealed his true left-wing radical colors recently with his completely predictable pivot away from ObamaCare and economic failure (not to mention all those “phony scandals”) to something near and dear to his community organizer heart: income inequality.
But the overwhelming majority of voters aren’t buying it. Only 13% of a random sample of 1,010 registered voters contacted by Anderson Robbins Research (D) and Shaw & Company Research (R) at the behest of Fox News believe income inequality is any of the government’s business.”
Published on Jan 22, 2014
” Billy Johnson exposes the flawed logic behind using ambiguous statistics to justify gun control.
Tune in to http://www.NRANews.com/Commentators for more episodes.”
” In the first 24 hours after the traffic scandal involving Chris Christie broke, the “major” networks gave it 17 times more coverage than they’ve given to Barack Obama’s IRS scandal over the last six months.
ABC, CBS and NBC devoted 34 minutes and 28 seconds of coverage to “Bridgegate” in 24 hours – compared to two minutes and eight seconds to the IRS targeting of Tea Party groups in six months.Good Morning America‘s George Stephanopoulos pounced on the developing Christie story first thing Thursday morning, opening GMA by trumpeting: “
” As 2014 begins, President Barack Obama’s approval rating is at its lowest point in his five-year tenure. Imagine where it would be if the establishment press treated him the way it did George W. Bush.
The president’s media apparatchiks are propping up what remains of the president’s popularity with five myths.
1. The economy has become strong, and is getting stronger.
Media reports have been calling recent job gains “robust.” Hardly. 2013′s estimated job growth of almost 2.4 million is still only 60 percent of what was achieved annually on a population-adjusted basis for a full six years during the 1980s. (See chart below.)
It’s bad enough that payroll employment is still 1.3 million below its January 2008 peak. It’s worse that employment in the Household Survey is 2 million shy of where it was in that same month. If we’re lucky and this plodding progress continues, it will have taken almost seven years for that more comprehensive measure of employment to return to where it was before the recession began — and several more years, if ever, before a recovery in employment catches up to eligible adult population growth.”
” “Top journalists from The New York Times, NBC News and CNN acknowledged Wednesday that, generally speaking, the national media has a liberal bias,” Politico’s media reporter Dylan Byers noted in a December 18 post recapping a Politico Playbook breakfast discussion held earlier on Wednesday morning.
More than one panelist opined that it’s not just that journalists tend to be liberal on policy questions but that they live and work in environments which are socially liberal. “I live in northwest Washington, none of my neighbors are evangelical Christians [and] I don’t know a lot of people in my kid’s preschool who are pro-life,” New York Times writer Mark Leibovich noted. Fellow Washington, D.C.-based journalist Jake Tapper picked up on that thread: ”
” You have to give liberalism a certain amount of credit. It doesn’t work, destroys lives, and pits people against each other, but that’s not to say that there are no advantages to being a liberal. Sure, you may end up sleeping in a tent in Zuccotti Park, reading Noam Chomsky’s laughably ignorant books, or having to watch Rachel Maddow babble incoherent nonsense on MSNBC, but the fringe benefits cannot be beaten!
1) If you’re a politician, no matter how dumb you are or how poor your decision- making is, the press will still never question your intelligence.
2) You can claim to personally speak for everyone in your gender or racial group, like you’re their leader, and the press will take you seriously.
3) You can feel completely superior to people who are more admired, more influential, richer, happier, more successful, and just generally better than you in almost every way (like Sarah Palin) because they’re conservatives.
4) You can declare that other people should have their money taken away and given to the government and still get credit for being “compassionate” even if you give nothing yourself.”
Conservative Conflict With Science On Evolution And Global Warming Has Been Exaggerated—While Liberals Get A Free Pass For Their Own Failings.
” In his first State of the Union Address in 1790, George Washington told Congress, “There is nothing which can better deserve your patronage, than the promotion of science and literature.” He went on to call science “essential” to our nation. Two hundred and twenty years later, in his first inaugural address, Barack Obama vowed to “restore science to its rightful place.”
The president’s insinuation plays into the common perception in the media, electorate, and research community that Republicans are “anti-science.” I encountered that sentiment routinely in nearly a decade working for Republicans on Capitol Hill, and it has become more commonplace in the broader political discussion. Frequent offenders include Slate‘s Phil Plait,Mother Jones‘ Chris Mooney, HBO’s Bill Maher, a host of contributors at The Huffington Post, and MSNBC’s Chris Matthews.
I’m the first to admit that there are elected Republicans with a terrible understanding of science—Representative Paul Broun of Georgia, an M.D. who claims evolution and the Big Bang are “lies straight from the pit of hell” is one rather obvious example—and many more with substantial room for improvement. But Republicans, conservatives, and the religious are no more uniquely “anti-science” than any other demographic or political group. It’s just that “anti-science” has been defined using a limited set of issues that make the right wing and religious look relatively worse. (As a politically centrist atheist, this claim is not meant to be self-serving.)”
This is a fine piece that acknowledges the bias inherent in the media’s coverage of science . For once the Left is shown to have it’s own science failings while it is demonstrated that Liberal media control of the press has resulted in very slanted reporting on the Right’s beliefs in science . There is nothing really new about slanted media coverage of the Right but just having this article published in the Atlantic is change , of a sort .
” In an interview with The Guardian (U.K.) published Friday, the left-leaning Seymour Hersh, best known for his Pulitzer-winning reporting that exposed the My Lai massacre during the Vietnam War, unloaded on the American news media for its underwhelming coverage of the Obama White House.
Hersh told The Guardian’s Lisa O’Carroll that the ABC and NBC news bureaus ought to be shut down and 90 percent of the editors fired for sake of fixing journalism.
The brunt of Hersh’s criticism was aimed at the U.S. media for its unwillingness to criticize the current commander in chief, Barack Obama, specifically for the narrative put out by his White House following the 2011 U.S. Navy Seal raid that resulted in the death of terrorist ringleader Osama bin Laden.
“It’s pathetic, they are more than obsequious, they are afraid to pick on this guy [Obama],” he said to The Guardian. “It used to be when you were in a situation when something very dramatic happened, the president and the minions around the president had control of the narrative, you would pretty much know they would do the best they could to tell the story straight. Now that doesn’t happen anymore. Now they take advantage of something like that and they work out how to re-elect the president.”
Don’t even get him started on the New York Times which, he says, spends “so much more time carrying water for Obama than I ever thought they would” — or the death of Osama bin Laden. “Nothing’s been done about that story, it’s one big lie, not one word of it is true,” he says of the dramatic US Navy Seals raid in 2011.”
” Curiously, a massive wave of anti-Obama sentiment in Egypt has been utterly ignored by vintage media, even though the protests may be the largest in all of human history.”
” Consider the dichotomy: Obama 2011: Mubarak Must Go; Obama Today: ‘It’s not our job to choose who Egypt’s leaders are’.”
” GOP lawmakers home for the Memorial Day recess predict they won’t have to do anything to further fan the flames over the IRS’s targeting of conservative groups.
The IRS’s treatment of Tea Party groups seeking tax-exempt status has already kept the full attention of Washington, and the public, for two full weeks – a length of time by which other many other controversies have faded into the background.
But in this case, the Washington media is showing no signs of losing interest, even as new developments – like the update on President Obama’s drone policies and the Oklahoma tornado – keep popping up.
“Even liberals and progressives in my district, that kind of like it that the Tea Party got it stuck to them because they don’t like the Tea Party know in their heart [that] the next administration could tip it my way.” “
Illustration by Dave Granlund