The New Rightwing Media...it is a propaganda mill

Quote:
"Why have conservative media outlets like The Weekly Standard and Fox New Channel become more popular in recent years?"

There is some strategy to it [bashing the 'liberal' media]...If you watch any great coach, what they try to do is 'work the refs'. Maybe the ref will cut you a little slack on the next one.

I've gotten balanced coverage, and broad coverage - all we could have asked. For heaven's sake, we kid about the 'liberal media', but ever Republican on earth does that.

I admit it. The liberal media was never that powerful, and the whole thing was often used as an excuse by the conservatives for conservative failures.

- how extreme are the positions commonly voiced within it.

In a fashion most dishonorable, these liberal Democrats have become tools of the terrorist - it's a shameful alliance. Case in point: As if Osama bin Laden himself prepared the manuscript from which he spewed his bile, Democratic leader Ted Kennedy, the senior Senator from Massachusetts, ramped up his attempts to undermine the war effort just three days prior to Iraq's free elections.

By attacking both our troops and their noble struggle, they offer aid and comfort to the enemy - they embolden and galvanize the terrorists in their effort to kill both Americans, and innocent Iraqi civilians.

Many agendas exist in the world of "objective" science, but none does more violence to science's search for and relation of truth than the feminist one. And the effect of feminism goes far and deep but, needless to say, its filters are most employed in the area of sex differences.

Not too long ago feminists were deathly afraid of such study, fearing that the differences found would indicate that men were superior, thwarting their agenda and providing a justification for discrimination. So a doctrine was developed stating that the sexes were the same, except for the superficial physical differences, and that differences in behavior between them were solely the result of upbringing.

This was treated as fact. It was palpably obvious. It was unarguable, unassailable and undeniable. Suggesting otherwise became a third rail of American discourse, constituted sacrilege and visited upon the offender scorn, pillorying and a branding with the label "sexist".

Now, I will submit to you my own set of conclusions with the promise that they will be at least as well reasoned as, and far less contradictory than, those of these often vaunted science writers. What does it mean when numerous parts of women's brains become active while only one part of men's does when performing most tasks? Well, it seems to me that this may vindicate the old assertion that women are scatterbrained, since [with most tasks anyway] women's brains become active in a "scattered" manner. Moreover, if the norm for men is to only use the part of the brain necessary to perform the task in question and quiet parts that would conflict with its function, it's entirely possible that theirs is the more efficient way of executing the task.

Now, can I prove these assertions? No, not anymore than the minions of feminism can prove theirs. Nor is it my intention to raise the ire of the members of the fairer sex who will imbibe these words. However, I'll pit my logic against these writers' and give them mighty good odds any day of the week. For, it makes much more sense to interpret this research in light of the wisdom born of millennia of observation by millions of individuals, than it does to simply look at brain structures and characteristics and attempt to divine what effect they should have. Why, the latter is very much like studying the brain of an elephant, noting that it dwarfs man's, ignoring what we know about the relative intelligence of the two beings and concluding that elephants must be more intelligent.

The conservative philanthropies are paying to place interns within major media institutions including USA Today and The Weekly Standard, who then in turn use the platform to push other conservative philanthropy product.

Philanthropic Institutions and Networks
Media Groups
From a report by NCRP

The foundations provided $16.3 million (1992-1994) in grants to help political conservatives shape public and elite opinion. This money has supported three interlocking purposes: the development of right-wing media outlets, the development of conservative public affairs programming on public television and radio and the development of right-wing media critics to exert pressure on the media mainstream into covering the right's political,and policy agenda.


Multiple grants totaling $1.7 million were awarded to the American Spectator Educational Foundation, with over $600,000 provided to expand editorial staff and reporting at The American Spectator, $515,000 in flexible general operating support, and $485,000 in special project funding. Large grants were also awarded to National Affairs, the funding vehicle for The Public Interest and The National Interest ($1.9 million), and the Foundation for Cultural Review for The New Criterion ($1.6 million). An additional $1 million was awarded to support Commentary magazine. Most of this grant money was awarded on an unrestricted basis, allowing these groups considerable flexibility to bolster their circulation, launch special projects or develop their analytical and reporting capacities....

The National Socialist Democrat Abortion Party (NSDAP) has found its Leon Trotsky. His name is Howard Dean, and, despite NSDAP claims to the contrary, as long as he is the party's national chairman he will be the face and voice of the party the public will see and hear.

He is, like Leon Trotsky, a firebrand.

Trotsky (born Lev Davidovich Bronstein) made his name putting together the murderous gang of thugs known as the Red Army; Dean gained a lot of notoriety early on organizing the unruly children's crusade known as the Deaniacs, who followed this pied piper into the red-state sea, where their hopes and dreams and fantasies drowned.

And like Trotsky, he is also an ardent socialist who, no matter what his supporters allege, looks always to the left. He is no centrist. Nor is his party centrist - it is a socialist party through and through, and Howard Dean fits that party like a glove.

Although brilliant and articulate, he is also a loose cannon, capable of firing leftist rhetoric like grapeshot and garnering huge coverage from the media as a result.

Think Dean will eventually move to Mexico City?

I don't know about that, but if he crosses the wrong 'Rat "power couple," I see a strong possibility of an ax in the back of his skull.

how it is interlinked

"I do listen to Rush (Limbaugh's radio program). I listen to it from a radio in my office or depending on my day, if I'm in the car, I will listen to Rush and he will tell you I've been listening for years. I think it's my duty to listen to Rush. I think Rush has actually yet to get the credit he is due because his audience for so many years felt they were in the wilderness of this country. No one was talking to them..."

HANNITY: Well, our good friend Ann Coulter actually did a little bit of investigative reporting and background. [Applause]. Apparently, this guy -- how many of you know that Churchill meet with Libyan dictator Moammar Gadhafi? Did y'all know that? I got some new -- she writes in her column today. And then announced to his group, the American Indian movement, he had not requested arms from the Libyan government. I guess we ought to be happy about that. Um, he has been out there talking to people and telling people that he is an American Indian. Apparently that is not true by all accounts. He has referred to himself as a chief in a combat unit in Vietnam. Well, in addition to the absence of evidence about his Indian heritage, there is an absence of evidence, just like John Kerry, that he ever was in combat in Vietnam.

Looking back at the special role played by Talon and [Jeff] Gannon in the South Dakota Senate campaign may provide clues in the mystery of the male-escort-cum-journalist's extraordinary access to the Bush White House.

The cooperation between the Talon News writer and Daschle's Republican challenger dates back to the early weeks of the South Dakota campaign, when Thune showed up as a guest on "Jeff Gannon's Washington," the writer's Internet radio program on Rightalk.com. It might have seemed unusual for a Midwestern Senate candidate to show up on an Internet radio show in Washington, where he would reach almost no listeners in his home state. But Gannon didn't waste Thune's time. His friendly questioning allowed the Republican candidate to lay out the themes of his campaign to unseat the incumbent: Daschle was an obstructionist opponent of the president, out of touch with the home folks, and married to a rich pharmaceutical lobbyist.

On Feb. 8, 2004, Gannon's interview with Thune was the subject of an article in the Argus-Leader, and immediately got picked up by "DaschlevThune," a Web blog operated by history professor and Republican activist Jon Lauck, and South Dakota Politics.com, run by a lawyer named Jason Van Beek. Lauck promoted a series of Talon News articles by Gannon, which charged that Dave Kranz, the Argus-Leader's chief political correspondent, and a three-decade veteran reporter, was in essence nothing more than a hit man for Daschle.

While promoting Talon and Gannon as credible journalistic sources, Lauck's blog reprinted sensational paragraphs posted by Gannon on the Talon News Web site, urging readers to take special note of the Talon reporter's "quite interesting article" about Daschle's "Sopranos-style" tactics. The story contained no actual evidence of misconduct by either the Democratic senator or the Sioux Falls newspaperman, beyond anonymous quotes that accused them of Mafia-like intimidation of "small business owners" and other beleaguered anti-Daschle dissidents. (The "Sopranos" story, like all of Gannon's other works, has been scrubbed by Talon's Republican owners from their Web site.)

The bloggers promoted dozens of Talon News attacks on Daschle, under the false flag of journalistic independence. They proclaimed themselves the paladins of truth, battling against South Dakota's "liberal media." Nobody in South Dakota would know until months after Nov. 2, when Daschle was so narrowly defeated, that those "independent" bloggers dogging him had been subsidized by the Thune campaign. But there, on the final post-election filings, were the names Lauck and Van Beek, who had been paid $27,000 and $8,000, respectively.

And nobody in South Dakota could know, until now, the true identity and purpose of "Jeff Gannon" and his employers at Talon News.