Jason Hayes

Libertarian thought, policy, religion, the environment, tech, coffee, and Tabasco – the stuff of life
This is my personal blog - the thoughts and ideas expressed here are posted on my own time and are mine and mine alone.

Google+

Archives

Jason Hayes Social Feeds

Great question

Brent Bozell asks a simple, but very pertinent question. That is, “at what point will the news media decide that that the IRS scandal is news?” How much more obvious does it need to get that something is rotten in the state of DC before the media takes part?

Cover up of a cover up is absolutely accurate because the media spent dozens of hours of nightly news covering the Bush TX ANG story. However, they are so thoroughly in the tank for the Obama administration that they can’t even be bothered to cover their own polls when those polls show a strong majority of Americans find fault with the President’s foreign policy.

CNN openly admits they are in the bag for Hillary

CNN anchors are now openly and laughingly admitting the media “are the biggest ones promoting (Hillary Clinton’s political) campaign so far.”

It’s time to stick a fork in American “journalism,” it’s done.

Hillary burnishes her anti-2nd Amendment cred

Hillary was out stumping for her 2016 Presidential run and burnishing her anti-2nd Amendment cred last night. In a CNN town hall she advocated for reinstating the “assault weapons” ban and attacked firearms owners, arguing that they “terrorize the majority” of Americans.

Asked by an audience member whether an assault weapons ban and magazine capacity limit would affect gun violence in the United States, Clinton answered, “We cannot let a minority of people, and that’s what it is, it is a minority, of people hold a viewpoint that terrorizes the majority of people.”

In other words, Clinton equated gun owners and gun rights advocates with terrorists. …

But the most galling aspect of Clinton’s response is her flippant dismissal of a substantial section of the population, and her flagrant disregard for Constitutional liberties. According to her, supporting the right to bear arms and protecting that right by being vocal about our liberties is terrorism

Jake Tapper picked up on the same thing in a recent Tweet.

CNN’s Don Lemon: “Because he’s black”

Very revealing to get a glimpse into the mind of at least one journalist, CNN’s Don Lemon.

I have to say that I would never criticize (or withhold criticism of) the President “because he’s black.” I would, however, criticize a President if he proposed and carried out policies that damaged the country, the Constitution, etc.

It is truly sad to see a self-professed journalist who would censor or alter his stories about anyone based on the color of that person’s skin. It speaks volumes about who Don Lemon is and what he believes to hear him admit that he does do that though.

As a “reporter,” Don Lemon also needs to work on his research and investigation skills a bit more. It is both laughable and naive to say that President Obama has put up with more criticism than previous Presidents, given the love affair that the media has had with him, and outright political aid and cover that they have provided for him throughout his Presidency.

Anyone who lived through the 80′s knows that Reagan was absolutely savaged by the media on a daily basis for his entire 8 years. Anyone remember stories about how he was trying to start World War III, how about Iran-Contra?

President Clinton and President HW Bush were both criticized heavily. Anyone remember the Monica Lewinsky issue, Ron Brown, “Bimbo eruptions”? Does anyone else remember “Read my lips, no new taxes” or “P-O-T-A-T-O-E”?

President GW Bush was routinely called “Bush-Hitler”. There were novels written about how people wanted to attack and injure – even murder – President Bush. The media just covered that as “art.” President Bush even had entire stories simply made up about him – Anyone recall Dan Rather’s hit piece and falsified memos re: the Texas ANG just days before the 2004 election? How about “Bush lied and people died,” or “WMDs? How about “Mission Accomplished,” or “Heckuva job Brownie,” “Harriet Miers”?

Again, Don Lemon’s research skills are obviously lacking and he openly admits that he alters stories based on the color of the subject’s skin. Tell me again why he is still working at CNN?

On the handling of scandals

christie_scandal

No further comment necessary.

Update: Apparently I was wrong. Bernard Goldberg‘s thoughts on this are worth reading.

It’s good to know that President Obama’s most loyal followers – the so-called mainstream media – have their priorities straight.  As reported by the (conservative) Media Research Center:
“In less than 24 hours, the big three networks have devoted 17 times more coverage to a traffic scandal involving Chris Christie than they’ve allowed in the last six months to Barack Obama’s Internal Revenue Service controversy. Since the story broke on Wednesday that aides to the New Jersey governor punished a local mayor’s lack of endorsement with a massive traffic jam, ABC, CBS and NBC have responded with 34 minutes and 28 seconds of coverage. Since July 1, these same networks managed a scant two minutes and eight seconds for the IRS targeting of Tea Party groups.”
Read the full article and consider the media’s stunning hypocrisy on this issue.

I am also consistently amazed that various “isms” are considered appropriate and funny when viewed from the political left. From the ‘in’ group at MSNBC laughing at Mitt Romney’s African-American grandson, to this cartoon depicting a grossly over-inflated Chris Christie sitting on a bridge and blocking traffic. To the political left, it is all funny and open for attack because it attacks an ostensibly conservative politician.

Christie

However, a similar cartoon that targeted a physical disability, weight issues, sexual orientation, religious views, etc. of a left-wing politician would be loudly and universally condemned throughout the media as proof of the inhumanity and insensitivity of the political right.

Larry Pratt of GOA decimates Piers Morgan’s anti-gun ranting

Here’s another recent video of Piers Morgan lowering the level of discussion to the gutter and logical fallacy.

The sum total of Piers Morgan’s arguments is this,

You are talking complete and utter nonsense….

… What you just said, Mr. Pratt, was an absolute lie …

… You’re an unbelievably stupid man, aren’t you? …

… What a ridiculous argument. You have absolutely no coherent argument whatsoever. You don’t give a damn, do you, about the gun murder rate in America. You don’t actually care …

… It’s complete nonsense …

… It’s down to idiots like you …

… You wouldn’t understand the meaning of the phrase ‘high level argument.’ You are a dangerous man espousing dangerous nonsense, and you shame your country …

Larry Pratt – whether you agree with his arguments or not – absolutely decimated Morgan’s scraping the bottom of the barrel style of argument. Pratt remained calm and collected throughout Morgan’s ad hominem laced assault. He made several logical points that repeatedly knocked Morgan off of his high horse. All Morgan had left in his pathetic bag of tricks was personal attacks.

Tom Brokaw critiques Biden’s debate performance

When even the Obama sycophants at MSNBC are critiquing Biden’s performance in the debate, you know he did a substandard job.

They’re laughing at Stephanie Cutter

Stephanie, honestly … When even the Obama sycophants at MSNBC are laughing at your talking points, you know you’re in serious trouble.

MSNBC edits audio again

Amazing to see MSNBC once again editing and misrepresenting news in a transparent effort to defame and detract from conservative candidates. (Remember the edits to Romney’s sandwich making comment and their equally odious edits to the Zimmerman 911 call? Note that I would be equally concerned if the editing and outright lies were being done in a manner that attacked and defamed liberal/progressive candidates.)

I have heard and read first hand accounts from more than one person who was at this campaign event and they are all saying that the crowd was yelling “Romney, Romney, Romney” and Mr. Romney stopped them and asked them to include Ryan in their chant. If one actually listens to the crowd, you can clearly hear that they are chanting “Romney.” However, that chanting is cut short by MSNBC audio techs. So they have deliberately misrepresented the crowd’s chant as “Ryan, Ryan, Ryan”. That way, when Romney stopped and asked them to chant both names, he appears weak and ineffective – having to remind the crowd who is leading the ticket. Instead Romney was lowering himself and raising up his running mate.

MSNBC apparently couldn’t stand to have Romney appear as a humble or self-effacing candidate, so they chose to smear the conservative in the story by editing the audio and reporting a lie.

Tell me again why anyone watches this channel? They’re not even doing a good job as a paid wing of the Democrat party because their attempts to smear the other side are so transparent that they become almost comical.

Romney releases tax returns & the left becomes completely unhinged

This says it all. The hatred being thrown in Romney’s direction will continue no matter the issue.

The left is now apparently furious at Romney for overpaying his taxes – that is intentionally limiting his deductions to boost his effective tax rate. They’re apparently claiming that he is doing this as a political ploy.

It’s amazing to see how – in a matter of a few hours – Romney has gone from being attacked as a dirty double-dealing alleged tax cheat, to someone who is even willing to overpay on his taxes to win an election. They’re actually claiming now that he will “(do) anything to win.” (See @goldietaylor on Twitter for an example)

Romney’s 2011 taxes show that he gave some 30% of his income ($4.021 million) to charity and paid a tax rate of 14.14% ($1.935 million on income of $13.697 million – which is actually over 20% of his income after charitable givings). That tax rate, along with a 20 year average tax rate of 20.2%, now makes Romney a bad man?

The political left has become completely unhinged.

See more on Twitchy, and Townhall.com.

Top 10 reasons Obama will lose

These are all good, accurate, and very valid points.

The working assumption, in the modern media, is that Obama simply cannot lose his reelection bid. Obviously, they want “The One” to be around for two. While their ever-present and sometimes intense rooting for him will certainly help Obama, there are a host of reasons why Obama will lose. Here’s a list:

With a record like Obama’s, this election is the Republican’s to win or to lose.

Scripted AZ news?

There’s an interesting discussion going on at AZ’s Espresso Pundit.

Short version of the post is that the so-called mainstream news media is squelching a story on the liberal state senate candidate Jerry Lewis. Lewis is running in the AZ LD 18 recall election. LD 18 is currently represented by State Senate President, Russel Pearce. The Espresso Pundit post cites a lawsuit brought by a former colleague of Lewis’. That lawsuit contends that 1) Lewis was involved in a a string of ethically suspect activities involving charitable donations to a Tempe school, and 2) When a colleague complained about Lewis’ questionable activities, she was terminated.

Even more interesting are the comments after the post. Some comments claim Lewis is a poor manager and was the cause of significant financial and morale troubles at the Tempe, AZ school where he served as Principal. Other comments claim Lewis is being unfairly treated and the colleague was terminated as a result of dwindling budgets.

Regardless of how the case is finally decided, the primary claim in the AZ Espresso Pundit post remains very valid. We have endured months of stories of Scott Bundgaard’s personal issues, we’ve been ceaselessly regaled with headline after headline of Russel Pearce’s failings, but we hear nothing more than the occasional cricket chirp when the Democrat liberal candidate opposing Pearce in the recall election is facing serious ethical and possibly criminal charges.

Where is the mainstream media on this story and why are they refusing to cover something this important to the voters in AZ LD 18?

Breitbart confronts bussed in “protestors”

It’s amusing to watch the union-directed rent-a-mob that was bussed in to protest the “hate” at Right Nation 2010. Rather than simply accept the cannard that any mob of angry left-wing ranters represents the will of the people, Breitbart walked over the the crowd and started asking them some simple questions. Not surprisingly, none of the protesters had any clue about why they were there, what their sign meant, who was “hating,” or how “hate” or “racism” was being shown by members of the TEA Party. None of them could or would explain why they were allowing themselves to be led around like sheep by the group leaders (Eugene Winkler and CJ Hawking) either.

Perhaps the most enlightening portion of the video was when one of the protesters (who was in the process of being whisked away from Breitbart’s questions by Winkler) loudly opined to her friends in the that she thought Breitbart was “gay.” Who would have thought that a group of big tent “progressives” who were there to protest the “hate” and “racism” in the TEA Party would so openly take pleasure in homophobic slurs?

The video is well worth watching in full because it clearly demonstrates the lack of rational thought, as well as the hate and bigotry that is present on the progressive side. It also demonstrates that the progressive protests we see on the news every night are very likely ready-made rent-a-mobs, bussed in by local unions and left-wing special interest groups.

To steal Nancy Pelosi’s term, they are Astroturf in every sense of the word and represent nothing more than the will of a few union thugs and left-wing activists.

“Have you seen any people of color around?”

Classic video by Bob Parks of Black & Right that asks several attendees of the 9/12 Tax Payer March if they’ve “seen any people of color around?”

Best line in the video is by the fellow at the end (3:30),

We’re just all American citizens, trying to speak to our president … and tell him “get your hands out of our pockets.”

Founding Fathers views on Mohammed & his doctrines

Pajamas Media has an excellent article discussing arguments that the Founding Fathers respected Mohammed and revered his doctrines and teachings. Apparently one specific talking head – Akbar Ahmed – has been claiming that John Adams, Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, and other Founding Fathers regularly read and were substantially influenced by the Quran and “respected” Mohammed and described him as a “model of compassion.”

Unfortunately Ahmed is 180 degrees out of phase with the truth. As the PJTV article notes, John Adams described Mohammed as,

“a military fanatic” who “denies that laws were made for him; he arrogates everything to himself by force of arms.”

John Quincy Adams wrote that Islam,

In the seventh century of the Christian era, a wandering Arab of the lineage of Hagar, the Egyptian, combining the powers of transcendent genius, with the preternatural energy of a fanatic, and the fraudulent spirit of an impostor, proclaimed himself as a messenger from Heaven, and spread desolation and delusion over an extensive portion of the earth. Adopting from the sublime conception of the Mosaic law, the doctrine of one omnipotent God; he connected indissolubly with it, the audacious falsehood, that he was himself his prophet and apostle. Adopting from the new Revelation of Jesus, the faith and hope of immortal life, and of future retribution, he humbled it to the dust, by adapting all the rewards and sanctions of his religion to the gratification of the sexual passion. He poisoned the sources of human felicity at the fountain, by degrading the condition of the female sex, and the allowance of polygamy; and he declared undistinguishing and exterminating war, as a part of his religion, against all the rest of mankind. THE ESSENCE OF HIS DOCTRINE WAS VIOLENCE AND LUST: TO EXALT THE BRUTAL OVER THE SPIRITUAL PART OF HUMAN NATURE. [emphasis in the original]

There are several other revealing quotes from Jefferson and Franklin. They’re well worth taking the time to review as a means of learning the Founding Fathers actual views on Mohammed and his doctrines.

Tea Party Express press conference: MSM in attack mode

Great video from the Tea Party Express people.

It’s really amazing to listen to the media fight with them over every little detail.

Reid is battling back due to JournoList-style media coverage

The mainstream, JournoList media has done its job well in Nevada and I’m sure more than a few of them will be lining up after the election to get some sort of payback from Senator Reid.

As of July 28, Rasmussen had Angle trailing Reid 43% to 45%. 58% of voters think Angle holds “extreme” views–no doubt due to our helpful friends in the MSM. Nevada “leans democrat,” Reid’s manufactured optimism is catching on, and Angle has been nearly-successfully painted as a nut. It’s not like nobody saw this coming, but it’s still unbelievable when you consider that Angle’s opponent is a perfect example of the cronyism and rabid progressivism that is currently running this great country into the ground.

It’s amazing to see the roll the media has played in bringing one of the least-effective, most-reviled, least-trusted, and corrupt politicians in the history of the Congress back to life. As of right now, they’ve handed him a Democrat-leaning lead in the November elections.

One has to hand it to the JournoList media because despite widespread recognition of their systemic and overbearing left-wing bias, they have managed to snow the people of Nevada once again. They’ve mounted one of the most effective negative ad campaigns against Sharon Angle, the U.S. electorate has seen in a long time. The only thing missing at the end of each of their articles in the now mandatory, “I’m Harry Reid and I support this message” footnotes.

What is truly sad is that the voters of Nevada appear to have bought their activism and overt Pro-Reid campaigning hook line and sinker.

Obama’s protective shield

Ramirez’s latest via Powerline Blog and IBD.

The MSM does more to protect Obama than his own secret service detail.

MSM continues to attack Fox for Administration and NAACP error

I find it increasingly amusing that those who are decrying the treatment that Shirley Sherrod received as a result of the now infamous edited video, so routinely set their sites on Fox News as the main protagonist in this farcical episode. I also find it ironic (and hypocritical) that Sherrod herself, while claiming to have been mistreated throughout the affair, has no difficulty whatsoever with continuing to flog the clearly inaccurate story that Fox News had a hand in her being fired.

As Charles Krauthammer rightly notes in this video clip (via NewsBusters) from PBS’s “Inside Washington,” the concerns that Sherrod — and those who have taken up the cause to defend her — is expressing should be with the NAACP and the Obama administration. Fox news had not commented on the Sherrod issue until after she had been publicly attacked by the NAACP (who would have been in possession of the original, unedited video from the day it was filmed) and fired by Vilsack and the Obama administration.

For those still biting on the hook being trolled by so many in the MSM, here’s Krauthammer’s comments.

Even more amazing that even after Krauthammer sets the record straight, Colby King, Mark Shields, and Nina Totenberg continue to attack Fox News.

Rasmussen: 59% of voters want immigration law like AZ SB 1070

Rasmussen just released new polling numbers that show 59% of voters across the nation want a law like Arizona’s SB 1070. These responses were given after the large protest rallies that were held in the wake of Governor Brewer signing the bill.

Also discussed in this news release was the fact that,

  • 55% of Colorado’s voters want a law similar to AZ SB 1070 passed in Colorado
  • 50% of voters have an unfavorable opinion of the pro-illegal immigration protestors

Not surprisingly, however, the people surveyed did not fit the misguided media and special-interest narrative that those who want illegal immigration controlled and the border secured are racist, hateful, and anti-immigrant. The Rasmussen numbers showed that,

  • 55% of voters were at least somewhat concerned of the potential for the violation of rights with increased border security
  • 59% of voters want to see immigration policy become “more welcoming” to potential immigrants, while only excluding “national security threats, criminals and those who would come here to live off our welfare system.”