I’m clearly no big fan of the Post Dispatched and their socialist leanings, but I must say today’s edition did not contain the normal socialist bias that usually permeates the papers.
They carried both the Hillary Clinton story and the Armstrong Williams story on page 20. Normally a story critical of the Bush Administration would be automatic front-page material. At least in placement within the paper they were somewhat balanced today. I suppose in a way they had no real choice since if they ran the Williams story on the front page they would have to run the Clinton story there also. Well no, normally they don’t follow those rules so it was different today. The hard-core liberal editors must have been off today.
The Williams story is that the Department of Education paid Armstrong for basically an infomercial without a disclaimer stating that the department had paid him. Williams is a leading conservative black voice in the media and he said he believed deeply in the No Child Left Behind program that he was promoting and would have done it without funding. I guess technically there should have been a disclaimer, but anyone who thought that Williams is not a Republican, is conservative, embraces conservative values and supports the Republican agenda is completely out of touch. No misrepresentation was done or bribing, there may have been an omitted disclaimer but that’s not really a big deal. It’s not serious enough for any fines or charges, rather a counseling was in order and given.
The Clinton story is that her former primary fundraiser was indicted on charges for false reporting. Basically, they would lie about the cost surrounding the fund raising event so they could skim more money for their political coffers. Sort of like the UN Oil for Food scandal. The charges if convicted would be $250,000 and up to five years in prison. Surprise, surprise, a Clinton lying, breaking the law, being unethical, and money is in the middle of the entire mix.
Although the Dispatched seemed pretty fair in the order of importance they listed them, their brothers-in-socialist-arms the AP, showed their colors in the story.
In the Clinton story they alluded to how it was rare for such a charge to be brought in a not so subtle suggestion that Clinton was being picked on. If one of their own is questioned of course the government is picking on them. Remember Hillary in the days after the Monica-gate story broke and how she said that a “conservative smear machine was out to falsely hurt her husband”. Wrong then wrong now.
The AP goes on about the Bush administration bribing a journalist and quotes such high ranking socialist party members like comrade Ted Kennedy, Frank Lautenburg, and Harry Ried, saying all kinds of typical socialist liberal crazy speak. They contend that the Bush Administration was bribing journalists and undermining the integrity of our democracy.
What a joke, after the Dan Rathergate and DNC bribe-off this past year how could they even say such a thing? I mean even for true Reds like those three that is past absurd. Not only Rathergate, but also Soros, Moore and the rest of the media red gang make this look like a blown out candle hardly a smoking gun. The MSM is a tool of the socialist left, with the exception of Fox and a few newspapers. The AP and other wire services feed these socialist media outlets and they spit out the same tainted and incorrect analysis day in and day out. See how that works, even when the Post Dispatched has a fairly balanced approach, they can rely on their red brothers providing the party line.
Well I’m sure that tomorrows Dispatched will return to normal and have a blatantly biased socialist tilt. I plan to spend more time on the Post in the coming days and providing my view of how they are reporting the news to their customers in this one newspaper town.
Update: I knew something was wrong and I did not even need to wait for the Sunday edition. I did not read the Editorial from the Post Dispatched Editor. It’s a smear job on our next Attorney General Alberto Gonzales. Basically the socialist moon bat says Gonzales is a poor choice because he cares more about protectioning America and American military personal from terrorists than he cares if a few terrorists are put in difficult situations both physically and mentally. Gonzales is on record saying he does not approve of torture but also states that terrorists do not have the same rights under the Geneva Convention, which is absolutely true. There are times when bad people who do not have the same rights as nationalist we are at war with, need to be pushed to talk. I do not condone torture but if strong actions short of torture are need against the animal terrorist to save a city or military personal then I'm completely for that. Isn’t it sad how the socialist left thinks that terrorists who in no way have the rights they argue they should have, are more important than protecting the American people.