July 15, 2008
Associated Press Shows
Their True Color: Yellow
Former White House Press Secretary Tony Snow lost
his battle with colon cancer last Saturday at the age of 53. Mr. Snow received
many great eulogies on his passing. We all knew him for being fair and informed
with a great many talents.
He hasn't even been buried and the Associated
Press (AP) had to unleash their cowardly venom on the conservative Tony Snow.
An "obituary" written by the AP's Douglass Daniel stated that Tony was
"not always in command of the facts." Not only was this insulting, it
was just plain incorrect. Daniel went on and said, "...Snow was turning the
traditionally informational daily briefing into a personality-driven media event
short on facts and long on confrontation." This Daniel attributed to nameless
critics. However, it was clear, the only critics saying this were Daniel and his
ilk.
Fox's conservative host Bill O'Reilly took Daniel and his boss, Tom
Curley to task for the editorial disguised as an obituary. Tom
Curley was invited to appear on O'Reilly's show to defend the AP, but did
not accept. O'Reilly said that Curley
was hiding under his desk.
It's taken a while and the death of a great intellectual
such as Tony Snow, but the AP is now unmasked for all to see. They even have now
stated that they are going to inject opinion into their news stories. Oh, really?
What do they think they have been doing as long as anyone can remember?
The
AP bills itself as a news gathering association. In reality, they are nothing
but a liberal propaganda machine hiding behind the First Amendment and spewing
hate and bias.
Is it any wonder why newspaper readership is at its lowest
in history? Some claim that the cause is the internet. However, back when radio
and then TV were first introduced, the prediction was that newspapers would die.
Instead they thrived.
No, the internet is different not in the fact that
people can get their news more quickly as on TV and radio,but because it's a two-way
medium. The people get to speak their minds and finally realize that there are
others out there that share their conservative views.
Talk radio, brought
the AM dial back to life. In a large part, this was due to conservative talk show
host Rush Limbaugh. Limbaugh's audience, estimated to be about 20 million listeners,
dwarfs any other such talk show, liberal or conservative. The reason Limbaugh
has such a huge following is that he is saying what others are thinking. His listeners,
called "Ditto Heads," are not mindless puppets. They are saying "ditto"
as a way of saying thanks to Rush for saying what is not only true, but what needs
to be said and more importantly, heard. "Ditto" takes up far less air
time than lengthy thank-yous and allows his listeners to get to their point.
Enter
the threat of the Fairness Doctrine. It is anything but fair. It is simply an
attempt for the left spew more lies, hate and doom and gloom. What the left can't
understand is it is not that their message isn't being heard, it has been heard
and it has been soundly rejected. Case in point, the failed liberal talk show,
Air America.
Air America had everything a new syndicated talk show could
want as a start-up: Money, stations, celebrities and publicity. It was only missing
one ingredient: content that people want to hear. Who wants to sit around and
listen to a bunch of liberal whiners? Apparently, no one. Air America went bankrupt.
Newspapers
still haven't realized this either. The smaller publications rely almost completely
on the AP for their content. Larger ones, such as the New York Times and the L.A.
Times do too, but they also have their own staff that spew lies and liberal hate
as well as simply make up stories that never occurred.
As their subscriptions
get cancelled and their advertisers leave, the liberals just scratch their heads
and wonder why. They point to Limbaugh, talk radio and the internet for blame.
They need only look in the mirror. If they bothered to read their tripe from a
reader's perspective, rather than writing for each other, it may dawn on them.
Even
their editorial pages that publish opinions from their readers are biased. It's
hard to find a conservative letter in the bunch. The editors claim that they publish
opinions in the ratio that they are received. In other words, if 90 letters out
of 100 are biased for the liberal side of an argument and they only publish ten
letters, nine will represent the liberal point of view.
This "logic"
ignores the fact that liberals tend to join letter writing campaigns and all of
the letters appear virtually identical with the same core talking-points. Of course,
this tactic worked, until talk radio and the internet allowed for a more balanced
view and busted their propaganda monopoly.
If we should really give more
credence to a liberal point of view simply because it received more letters, maybe
we should all eat dog excrement. After all, look at the billions of flies eating
it. How could they possibly be wrong with dog excrement with numbers like that?
No,
the best use for today's newspapers is training puppies, lining the bottom of
bird cages and starting barbeques.
Tony, we will really miss you. Godspeed.
TLG
