A few days ago the DC bureau published this piece on ACORN's rise and fall -- the article quoted several ACORN supporters but no ACORN critics. And Monday there was this piece on the Justice Department announcing it would review whether it gave ACORN any funds, and if so, how the funds were spent. That's it.
I'll leave it to readers to judge whether the news organization with "Truth to Power" as its motto is interested in exposing ACORN's corruption.
O come on now. Acorn is old news. Time to move along here. Nothing to see.
“Alinsky’s rules for radicals” will defeat and destroy Obama (and McClatchy), yes defeat Obama (The Collins Report)
The best thing about Saul Alinsky is he didn’t breed so we won’t see his poisonous offspring organizing illegal aliens or strikes.
We’ve heard about Alinsky’s rules for radicals almost constantly since Barack Obama’s nomination.
We’ve been warned how they were going to end America and make us a socialist gulag.
But the “rules” are smacking up against new realities and losing: We’re not afraid.
Different times a different America Alinsky wrote his “Rules for Radicals” before his death in 1972. The world and our nation have become far different places since then. Al Gore hadn’t invented the internet yet.
Alinsky was a product of his time.
He wrote in his glowing contentment at the Democrats’ surrender in Viet Nam, and he was still savoring our national weakness from the moral decay of the 1960s He mistakenly concluded rapid fire non stop attacks would collapse America and prepare us to be meekly marched into Soviet style socialism.
That was then this is now
Obama has naively based his entire plan of attack against us on Alinsky’s outdated “rules.” This will be his downfall.
Americans aren’t cowering from Obama’s “Alinskyism.” We’re informed and these attacks are only making us fight harder.
When we held “pro Viet Nam War” rallies they were 5,000 people gatherings largely in lower Manhattan and Chicago’s Loop.
Never would 2.2 million Americans take over Washington’s streets with another 500,000 patriots at local rallies across the country.
The America Alinsky lived in and hated could never have produced unafraid well spoken very well informed champions of freedom who could stand toe to toe with lying Democrats trying to destroy America.
So let Obama bring on Alinsky’s rules. Both of them are kings with new suits of clothes and America’s patriots are seeing this more clearly by the day.
What kind of a newspaper bad mouths whistleblowers who blow the whistle on corruption? McClatchy doesn't speak truth to power, its essence is as a whore to those who would empower the state. In that sense, The Star, as a handmaiden to corruption here in KC, is typical of the brand.
Folks, this is worse than you can imagine as the bankers of Charlotte were ground zero for growing ACORN.
Ed Crutchfield at First Union and Hugh McColl at NationsBank were long-time "partners" with ACORN, entering into what grew into multi-million agreements which set up ACORN to "pre-qualify" borrowers. The banks figured such deals were well worth it if it removed potential regulatory roadblocks to mergers and expansions while at the same time gradually racheting down regulatory concerns over sub-prime lending and the overall risk profile of ACORN-developed loans.
Objectively, there is a big fat news analysis waiting to be done on the banks' role in ACORN's rise.
An analysis that I guarantee you will never be done by your newspaper. here in Kansas City the Health Care Foundation dumped funding for the City Union Mission and the Salvation Army based on their sincerely held religious beliefs (the money for the foundation came from the sale of a church owned hospital). They provided actual medical services to the poor and downtrodden.
Instead the leftist parasites who infiltrated the foundation decided to spend money on "advocacy) including grants to ACORN and other very questionable projects, some of which weren't even in their service area.
The Star ignored the religious discrimination and also the transfer of the funds to these other questionable projects even though they were well aware of them. Indeed, a well respected local Dr. resigned from the advisory board in protest and wrote a letter to the editor. The Star refused to cover his resignation and also refused to print his letter, such are the handmaidens to corruption at McClatchey.
How about the corruption at Faux?
Fox becomes the scandal
On Friday, Media Matters released a video showing a Fox News producer stage-managing a 9/12 protest crowd.
The video -- which shows a producer waving her arms in the air, encouraging a crowd of 9/12 protesters to make noise for a live shot -- provides some of the clearest evidence yet of Fox's central role in manufacturing anti-Obama dissent.
The video isn't really a surprise: anyone whose watched coverage of protests can see that Fox is sympathetic to the protesters, but this video offered a rare behind-the-scenes glimpse of Fox actually fueling the fire of the very same crowds they claim to be covering.
By any sort of journalistic standards, the producer's behavior was unethical in the extreme, yet Fox has refused to fire her. To mitigate any potential damage from the tape's release, Fox did claim that the producer had been "disciplined" -- but she still has a job.
The fact that Fox is willing to keep the producer on their payroll shows that they don't really care that she tried to stoke up the crowd -- what they care about is that she was caught. That, in turn, reinforces what everybody should already know: Fox News has no journalistic integrity of which to speak.
Could we please have these Media Matters propaganda releases deleted on sight? This is not a news agency, a blog or any valid source of information by any definition.
12:45 What you describe is very common for TV reporting of political events. Often they'll take a tight shot to make it appear that it was a big crowd and an exciting event. It doesn't help any ones ratings to show dull pictures of poorly attended events.
What we're talking about with McClatchy (and The Star) is providing explicitly favorable coverage to cronies and political allies and explicitly negative, or non, coverage to political enemies and reform candidates (of both parties). This coverage also facilitates not simply ideological favoratism, but more importantly enhances the *financial* prospects of their friends and allies.
The Health Care Foundation is a typical example. The Foundation handles millions upon millions of dollars that are now being doled out to leftist groups such as ACORN (and others who are not even active in the service area). By not revealing the scandals in that organization, The Star facilitates the continued financial exploitation of the Foundation's resources.
In the recent local elections The Star wrote scathing editorials condemning three reform candidates (2 Democrats and 1 Republican) running for community college seats in Johnson and Wyandotte Counties and a commission seat on the Unified government in Wyandotte County. At the community colleges the reform candidates had challenged the financial practices at their respective institutions, and the third, the candidate running for the UG, was responsible for criminal indictments against establishment figures involving over $400,000 of alleged misappropriations.
The Star described their activities as disruptive and implied that they were just troublemakers. The UG candidate was tarred with a 25 year old drug conviction from his youth.
Their endorsements went for the Chamber of Commerce establishment types who wouldn't say shit if they had a mouthful.
These aren't ideological decisions these are endorsements that specifically and explicitly serve to perpetuate the same corrupt establishment that caused George magazine to rank Kansas City as one of the top 10 corrupt cities in the US.
My biggest gripe isn't that the Star is ideologically biased. If they were at least honest two of these reform candidates should have prevailed (the 2 Dems), but The Star is not an honest newspaper and our community suffers as a result.
Media Matters is funded by Soros, and there is no place for his garbage on this blog. Shitcan it on sight!
Evidently opposing comments are not welcome according to 'shitcan it on site."
You folks enjoy your little echo chamber, y' heah. For the record, McClatchy watch, the fake pimp and hooker aren't whistle blowers...that would mean they actually were working for Acorn. That is my cartoon you posted, btw. You Neocons get all giggly over a few sad nuts at Acorn but don't seem to give a s### about illegal torture techniques, troops being fried in showers in Iraq because of greedy, corrupt contractors or the actions of so many perverts in what's left of the republican party.
You aren't conservatives, for Christ sake...you are D###Heads who could care less for your fellow human beings.
Next time I need an example of a dimwitted, ad hominem I will reference your post. Thanks.
At least you signed your comments, Dwane. Since you're not happy with the term whistleblowers, what term would you use, and why would we respect your concerns, if you don't respect ours?
For the record, McClatchy watch, the fake pimp and hooker aren't whistle blowers..
...and copying and pasting of Media Matters propaganda is not an opposing comment.
I see why you draw pictures. (very poorly) You're too unstable for rational conversation.
You all will have to forgive D Wayne. (Slow Ride) They did a Mike Hendricks on him and took all his benefits, cut his pay and told him evel capitalists did it to him.
...What we're talking about with McClatchy (and The Star) is providing explicitly favorable coverage to cronies and political allies and explicitly negative, or non, coverage to political enemies and reform candidates (of both parties)...
A perfect description of Faux.
...Media Matters is funded by Soros, and there is no place for his garbage on this blog. Shitcan it on sight!...
Translation: I've made up my mind. Don't confuse me with facts.
What Dwane ignores is that much of this discussion has focused not on his obvious ideological bias (and equally obvious narrow minded perspective, speaking of echo chambers), but the willingness by McClatchy to act as the handmaidens to corruption. Neither Dwane's cartoon nor his comments express one iota of concern for controlling corruption. Indeed, his work serves to demean those who would fight corruption, something we've found to be typical of McClatchy and its editorial page staff and reporters.
And for 7:21/22 The distinction being between ideological bias at Fox and outright corruption at McClatchy, something I suspect you can't grasp since your only posts here involve the same tired and silly translation comments.
I suspect you can't grasp since your only posts here involve the same tired and silly translation comments.
Yes, but it sure makes it easy to track him.
Post a Comment