The Ten Most Blatant Examples Of Media Bias During Jan-Feb 2011 (Part One)

The 18^th Century British Politician/Political Theorist Edmund Burke is given credit for coining the term “Fourth Estate.” He said “there were Three Estates in Parliament; but, in the Reporters' Gallery yonder, there sat a Fourth Estate more important far than they all.” The job of that Fourth Estate was to watch and report the truth about the first three estates; the Clergy, Nobility and the People. That concept doesn’t really fit into the American tradition so here in the U.S., the term has been “Americanized,” the mainstream press is known as “the fourth branch of government.” It refers to the fact that the news media’s responsibility to inform the citizenry is essential to the healthy functioning of the democracy.

Interesting is the fact that the difference in the terms says much about the media in the U.S. today. Rather than standing off in a gallery watching the other “Estates,” a fourth branch is connected to the other three, their success is interdependent with their objectives. In recent years our mainstream media has truly become a “fourth branch,” who has abandoned a quest for truth for a new goal, presenting as fact the propaganda of an increasingly progressive government, to the American people.

Even though 2011 is only two months old there are already many examples of the media’s progressive bias. I have created a list of my ten "favorites" below are numbers 10-6:

If you cannot see the videos with this post please CLICK Here)

10) Obama is Reagan? -To help rehabilitate the poor image of the POTUS, a late January Issue of Time Magazine exploited the 100^th Birthday of a popular president, Ronald Reagan. Their mission was to create perception that Barack Obama was “pivoting to the right” and from now on was going to “channel the Gipper.”

Time magazine writes that President Obama has been "channeling" former President Ronald Reagan as he tries to pivot to the right.

At a glance, it's hard to imagine a President who had less in common with Reagan than the Ivy League lawyer from Hawaii who seeks larger federal investments, a bigger social safety net and new regulations for Wall Street and Big Oil. But under the surface, there is no mistaking Obama's increasing reliance on his predecessor's career as a helpful template for his own. Since the November elections, Obama has brought corporate executives into the White House, reached out to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and made compromise his new watchword. He signed a surprise $858 billion tax cut that would have made Reagan weep with joy and huddled with Reagan's former White House chief of staff Ken Duberstein for lessons learned when the Gipper governed amid economic troubles. Over the Christmas break, White House press secretary Robert Gibbs tweeted that Obama was reading a Reagan biography, and just to confirm the bond, Obama recently wrote an homage to Reagan for USA Today. "Reagan recognized the American people's hunger for accountability and change," Obama wrote, conferring on Reagan two of his most cherished political slogans.

Forgetting the obvious factual errors such as there was no $858 billion dollar tax cut, Time (and Obama) have totally mislead readers about Reagan’s legacy. At its core, all the policy differences stem from the fact that Ronald Reagan had a love and trust of the United States political system, its freedom, values and most important, and its people that was not only unprecedented in recent American history, but is totally antithetical to Barak Obama’s basic values.

Reagan saw the U.S. as Shining City upon a Hill,

“I've spoken of the shining city all my political life, but I don't know if I ever quite communicated what I saw when I said it. But in my mind it was a tall proud city built on rocks stronger than oceans, wind-swept, God-blessed, and teeming with people of all kinds living in harmony and peace, a city with free ports that hummed with commerce and creativity, and if there had to be city walls, the walls had doors and the doors were open to anyone with the will and the heart to get here. That's how I saw it and see it still.”

Obama thinks differently, within the first 100 days of the Obama administration the POUTUS went on an apology tour, telling the French that America "has shown arrogance and been dismissive, even derisive" toward Europe, the Czechs , that America has "a moral responsibility to act" on arms control because only the U.S. had "used a nuclear weapon," the British that decisions about the world financial system were no longer made by "just Roosevelt and Churchill sitting in a room with a brandy” and the Latin Americans, the U.S. had not "pursued and sustained engagement with our neighbors" because we "failed to see that our own progress is tied directly to progress throughout the Americas."

Sorry Time, I knew Ronald Reagan, Ronald Reagan was a President of mine, believe me Barack Obama is no Ronald Reagan.

9) Al Sharpton is The Owner of the Martin Luther King Day Legacy - It is totally incredible how the mainstream media continues to put Al Sharpton on a pedestal as the “keeper of the MLK Flame.” Al Sharpton wouldn't recognize Dr. King's legacy if it jumped up did back-flips and kissed him on the lips.

Dr. King sent a message of peace for all Americans. He combined his great faith, honor for all people and his hope that only by joining together could people could create a better America.

On the other hand, Sharpton sends a message of hate and divisiveness, he is a professional bigot. During his long career the Reverend's words have incited two anti-Semitic pogroms; the Crown Heights riot and the firebombing of the Jewish-owned Freddy’s Fashion Mart. Each of the Sharpton-incited pogroms resulted in deaths (a total of nine), but for some unknown reason Reverend Al is protected by the Mainstream Media.

Just a few days before this year’s Martin Luther King holiday, Rev. Al told a crowd at a minority union conference that MLK’s legacy was not for all Americans. He accused Palin, Beck, the Tea Party and others of trying to steal the legacy of Martin Luther King Jr. "Don't let them steal our crown, this is our crown."

If you were looking for Shapton’s arrogance to be reported by the "fourth branch of government" forget it, six week later and there is still nothing.

Just a few days later, on the actual MLK Holiday, the man of hate impersonating a Reverend appeared on MSNBC with Little Donny Deutsch and told lies about the state of Arizona. The two decided that Arizona should secede from the Union because of the recent Tucson shooting and because Arizona hadn't yet recognized the Martin Luther King Holiday.

If Sharpton cared more about history than divisiveness, he would have mentioned that Arizona made the holiday official in 1992. Actually there were two states whose recognition of the holiday was even later. New Hampshire didn't recognize the Holiday until 1999, South Carolina recognized the national holiday but didn't make it a state holiday until 2000.

In Virginia Dr. King had to share the day with Robert E. Lee, and Stonewall Jackson as the holiday was known as Lee-Jackson-King Day until the year 2000 when Virginia realized that there was something wrong with having a Civil Rights Icon share a holiday with a Confederate Army General and the King Holiday was split off and given its own name. But Mississippi still shares this weird arraignment of sharing Martin Luther King, Jr.'s birthday and Robert E. Lee's birthday together.

Unless you were watching MSNBC at the time, or reading about it on a conservative site, this example of Sharpton’s divisive rhetoric would have been lost to history, because no mainstream outlet covered it. But if it was a conservative who made the same mistake…..

8) Reading the Constitution is a Waste of Time. At the start of the 112^th Congress, the Republicans in the House of Representatives decided to initiate a unique ritual as a response to voter concern that bills passed by the 111^th Congress, such as Obamacare, were in violation of the Constitution. The House was to begin the session by reading aloud the Constitution of the United States.

The New York Times bashed the move, and published an editorial called “Pomp, and Little Circumstance” which rebuked the GOP for wasting the people’s time by starting off the 112th Congress with a reading of the United States Constitution.

“ ….The empty gestures are officially intended to set a new tone in Washington, to demonstrate — presumably to the Republicans’ Tea Party supporters — that things are about to be done very differently. But it is far from clear what message is being sent by, for instance, reading aloud the nation’s foundational document. Is this group of Republicans really trying to suggest that they care more deeply about the Constitution than anyone else and will follow it more closely?”

The Times doesn’t even understand what the Constitution is all about, it is not just a “foundational document,” it is the rule book; the guide for the way our U.S. Government is supposed to work. At the very least each member of the Congress should not only be made to listen to a reading of the constitution, they should be made to commit it to memory. The oath that members of Congress take as part of their swearing in ceremony compels them to the defense of the Constitution as their first priority.

“ I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God.”

If these members of Congress have sworn to support and defend the Constitution, shouldn’t they know what’s in the document? How many times during the 111^th Congress did the American people learn that their legislators voted for a piece of legislation without even knowing what is in it? Obviously that same 111th Congress did not follow their commitment to the Constitution.

The next part of the NY Times editorial shows that they hadn't read the Constitution in a while. It goes on to label the reading of the constitution as a self-righteous act and suggesting that it has possible racial overtones.

“In any case, it is a presumptuous and self-righteous act, suggesting that they alone understand the true meaning of a text that the founders wisely left open to generations of reinterpretation. Certainly the Republican leadership is not trying to suggest that African-Americans still be counted as three-fifths of a person.”

That’s just the usual attempt of the progressives to label the GOP as racist. Anybody who ever studied the United States Constitution would also know that the three-fifths clause was not a measurement of human worth; it was an attempt to reduce the number of pro-slavery proponents in Congress.

In its haughtiness, the New York Times has relegated the Constitution of the United States, to the dustbin, a historical nicety. The Times has become part of the fourth branch of the progressive government. What used to be a proud protector of the truth has become nothing but a mouthpiece for a political movement whose goal is to destroy the meaning of that perfect document ratified on June 21, 1788.

7) Somebody Teach Chris Matthews the Difference Between Forbearers and Forefathers- Minnesota Rep. Michele Bachmann is a favorite target of the progressive left. She has this nasty of not mincing words when she tells the truth, offending their over-the-top politically correct sensibilities. So in mid-January when she made a speech in Iowa they went on their usual attack, one problem with their ranting was they attacked her for saying something that she never said. And the leader of the attack was “Mr. Tingle down his leg,” MSNBC’s Chris Matthews.

During her Iowa speech, Rep. Bachmann spoke out how the scourge of slavery was a horrible chapter in our country’s history, but we should give credit to our “forbearers who worked tirelessly to eradicate slavery,” As an example, she offered up John Quincy Adams and his efforts on behalf of the abolitionist movement.

While Bachman said “forbearers,” Matthews though she said forefathers (which would have been accurate also except for the John Quincy Adams reference). The MSNBC tingle-man-in chief went on a 3-day rampage against Bachmann.

OK Chris, let me try and explain it to you; forefathers are guys like John Adams, Ben Franklin and Thomas Jefferson, who created our country. Forbearers are people such as John Quincy Adams, Abe Lincoln, and Calvin Coolidge of the mid-nineteenth century are forebears they came before us. So while all of the six people I named are forbearers only the first three are forefathers.

Get it? No, I didn’t think you would. Maybe the fourth branch of government needs some hearing aids.

6) The Muslim Brotherhood Are “nice guys” When it became apparent that President Obama would back the Muslim Brotherhood’s participation in any new Egyptian government, the progressive media went all out to prove that they were just the nicest of folks. Forgetting of course the fact that both Hamas and al Qaeda trace their roots from the Muslim Brotherhood.

For example, US Government funded NPR wrote that the Brotherhood only has a bad reputation because of Hosni Mubarak’s propaganda:

“Mubarak has used the group's sometimes violent past to justify a stifling state-of-emergency law that has been in place for 30 years.

But many analysts describe the Brotherhood as a moderate Islamic political and social movement that is fiercely nationalistic and engages in philanthropy. It appeals largely to Egypt's urban professionals and the middle class. Many of the group's leaders are well-educated — physicians and pharmacists and engineers.”

Being a physician does not make one a non-violent moderate, but then again one would not expect NPR to remember people like Josef Mengele.

Now it may be correct, as the progressives would tell you, that there are some moderate elements of the Muslim Brotherhood but even if that is the case, it is the extremely violent, fundamentalist majority that runs the organization.

Muslim Brotherhood big shot Kamal al-Halbavi has been traveling the world speaking for the group. Two week ago was interviewed by the BBC Persian channel and praised his buddies in Iran saying that they should be the role model for the new Egyptian government.

‘Halbavi further expressed hope that Egypt would have “a good government, like the Iranian government, and a good president like Mr. Ahmadinejad, who is very brave.”

When asked about the Muslim Brotherhood’s opinion of Ayatollah Khamenei’s statements on Egypt’s developments, Halbavi said, “Many thanks for Imam Khamenei and all who support the revolution in Egypt.”

Ayatollah Khamenei said in Tehran’s Friday prayers last week that the recent developments in North Africa are the result of “Islamic awakening, which followed the great Islamic Revolution of the Iranian nation.”

The Leader of the Islamic Revolution made reference to Egyptians’ fight for “dignity and honor” and noted that Mubarak’s biggest crime was turning Egypt into an instrument in the hands of the United States.”

The Muslim Brotherhood’s “role model,” Iran is one of the most despotic regimes of the world, that doesn’t seem very “moderate” to me

Last week speaking at an Islamic conference Halbavi was even more generous with his praise saying that the Iranian regime serves as a model of resistance against the West’s domination and a model for the Muslim world and Ummah (community), and that Iran should be seen as a model of "justice, unity among Shia and Sunni, human rights and respect for humanity."

But wait! Didn't the liberals make fun of John McCain during the election when he talked about the Sunni and Shia working together? Certainly the Muslim Brotherhood can't get along with Iran. Well watch the video below and you decide.




There can be only one reason for the fourth branch of government's fake moderate meme, to support the President’s naïve foreign policy.

The United States is facing perhaps the biggest crises in it's 235 year history, our government is: ignoring the constitutional blueprint that helped to make this country so prosperous for most of its history, they are encroaching upon the individual freedoms that nurtured American ingenuity and they are driving the economy off the cliff of insolvency.

As Burke described the press, it was the watchdog letting the public know what was really going on in the government. But the press it has become the "fourth branch" of our government dedicated not to the truth but to perpetuating the progressive elements of the system.

As the five examples above have shown, the press is no longer our watchdog, they are part of shield trying to hide the truth from the people. And those aren't even the worst examples Tucson and Wisconsin have not been touched as of yet. Tune in next Sunday for the worst of the worst as we count down the top five most blatant examples of media bias during the first two months of 2011.

And just to prove that he meant what he said, when he went to Iran this week Kamal el-Helbawi was even more generous with his praise. Saying that the Iranian regime serves as a model of resistance against the West’s domination and serves as a model for the Muslim world and Ummah (community), and that Iran should be seen as a model of "justice, unity among Shia and Sunni, human rights and respect for humanity."

But wait! Didn't the liberals make fun of John McCain during the election when he talked about the Sunni and Shia working together? Certainly the Muslim Brotherhood can't get along with Iran. Well watch the video below and you decide.