Failure to Report Massive Crowds for McCain-Palin

Remember how the mainstream media went bonkers over the massive crowds that went to see rock-star wannabe Barack Obama early in the campaign? Remember their panoramic camera views of the crowds in Europe when their beloved Obamessiah spoke in Germany and Paris?

Interestingly but not surprisingly, now that John McCain and Sara Palin are attracting mega-crowds following the Republican National Convention, the mainstream media has ignored and failed to report the groundswell of grassroots attention being given to the GOP team.

When the mainstreams cover Palin and McCain, gone are the camera shots of throngs of people waiting in line and standing to see the pair.

Clearly, Couric, Gibson, Williams, Cooper, and company do not want the public to see these images. They want the images of Obama's crowds sticking in their minds.

Michelle Malkin has much more on this story. It is well worth the time to go see it, if you are interested in fairness and truth in political reporting.

Frankly, I wouldn't give these partisans the time of day if I were Sarah Palin or John McCain. Palin is doing an extensive interview with Gibson at ABC. I know politicians have to do the obligatory dog-and-pony show with these charlatans, but it is getting to the point to where enough is enough.

If Gibson and his colleagues in the mainstream media are going to openly fawn all over Obama, then if I were on the other side, I would tell him and the rest of the goons to go jump as I flipped them the bird.

Why give the enemy publicity by granting an interview? Why enable the careers of those who under the guise of being news reporters actually attempt to change public opinion and openly campaign for a political candidate?

It is really no wonder network news broadcasts are quickly going the way of the dinosaur. And the quicker they die the better the Republic will be. The public gets its news from plenty of other sources these days, and we are much better off for it.

COWARDS! Dems Ditch Fox Debates AGAIN

Washington, DC (TLS). For the 2nd time in two months, the candidates for the Democratic Presidential nomination have pulled out of debates sponsored by Fox News.

The first time, the candidates ditched a Fox-sponsored debate over something Roger Ailes said about Barack Obama. So, they picked up their rattles and pacifiers, and went home.

This time, Fox was planning a mammoth debate co-sponsored by the Congressional Black Caucus and the CBC in September.

But Barack Hussein Obama pulled out today, citing a policy of only participating in 'Democratic National Committee sanctioned debates.' Yet Obama stated that 'CNN would be a more appropriate venue.'

Sure, Senator. We understand. CNN will throw you soft-balls just as all the mainstream media news outlets have done. You wouldn't want to face the tough questions Fox may pose, would you? You know....like Republicans have had to do for decades at the hands of a hostile mainstream media that clearly preferred Liberal candidates?

B. Hussein Obama is not the only coward in the mix, however.

Hillary Clinton also bailed today, citing the same supposed 'policy' of appearing only at 'DNC-sanctioned debates.'

What the heck is that, anyway? 'A DNC-sanctioned debate.' Hmmm.

Let me guess. A DNC-sanctioned debate will mean Fox News will not be allowed to have any part of it. A DNC-sanctioned debate will probably involve Katie Couric, Matt Lauer, Wolf Blitzer, or Helen Thomas. No questions will be allowed on Hillary's graduate thesis at Wellesley, showing her metamorphosis from a Goldwater Republican to an extremist Leftist collectivist who prefers European styled Socialism to American free enterprise.

In addition, no questions would be raised concerning Obama's connections to extremists in Islam (even his own pastor questioned his ties to Islam when Obama joined the United Church of Christ--another ultra-Leftwing outfit that takes every opportunity possible to bash America). And of course, a DNC-sanctioned event would involve absolutely no questions about the fact that Obama has the most Liberal voting record in the Senate--even more so than Ted 'Senator Blowhard' Kennedy.

Hillary would also be given a pass on her enormous dark cloud of corruption that follows her and her husband wherever they go.

My friends, what if Newt Gingrich were to say, 'I will not appear at any debate except that which is sanctioned by the Republican National Committee?'

Or what if Rudy Giuliani were to say, 'I will appear only at debates sponsored by Fox News?'

What do you think would be the response of the mainstream media to such statements on the part of Republicans?

I can tell you it would dominate the news for months. Charles Gibson and his colleagues at the other networks would see to that.

Yet this is the 2nd time--read that again, the SECOND TIME--the Democrat cowards have refused to appear at a debate involving Fox News.

If the mainstream media allows these clowns to get away with this without sounding the clarion alarm about how candidates are ducking the hard questions, then there will be even more ample proof that they are in the hip-pocket of the DNC and the Democratic candidates.

Of course, we knew that anyway. We already know for a fact that George Soros paid them off and met with them regularly during the 2006 election cycle to talk with them about pushing stories that made Bush look bad and squelching stories that made him look good.

It is obvious that the cowardly lame-brains that make up the field of Democratic candidates this year want nothing but soft-peddled questions. They want to dictate what will and will not be asked. They want to avoid pointed questions that shine the spotlight on their glaring faults, contradictions, and extremist ideology.

In short, they are yellow-bellied cowards that don't even have the guts to face Fox News! So, tell me, how in the HELL will they muster up the courage to face Mahmoud Ahmadinejad or Kim Jong Il?