Tag Archives: broadcast

MRC-TV: Bozell Discusses Media’s Inattention to New Black Panther/Justice Dept. Story with Sean Hannity

The Obama/Holder Department of Justice closed down an investigation into voter intimidation on Election Day 2008 by the New Black Panther Party in Philadelphia. Yet the broadcast news media have been virtually silent on the matter, making it the first item in last night’s “Media Mash” segment on Fox News Channel’s “Hannity.” Noted NewsBusters publisher Brent Bozell: Here you had a whistleblower from the Department of Justice saying how Eric Holder, the Attorney General, and his office stepped in and stopped the prosecution of these Black Panther people. He claimed it was the easiest prosecution in his career. He said everything was on video, everything was on tape…. It was a slam dunk…. Look, the media are refusing to cover just how radical this attorney general is… “You have people in paramilitary uniforms, you know, spewing racial epithets at voters as they go into the polling place… obviously a case of voter intimidation. Still no coverage on ABC, CBS, NBC, several major newspapers in this country,” host Sean Hannity observed. In addition to this incident, Hannity and Bozell discussed the media blackout of NASA administrator Charles Bolden’s interview with al-Jazeera in which he stated his “foremost” objective assigned by the president was helping Muslim nations “feel good” about their “historic contribution” to “science, math and engineering.” For the full “Media Mash” segment, click here for MP3 audio or here for WMV video , or watch the video embedded above at right.

Read this article:
MRC-TV: Bozell Discusses Media’s Inattention to New Black Panther/Justice Dept. Story with Sean Hannity

Sarah Palin: ‘You Don’t Wanna Mess With Conservative Women!’

In a new video out today, Conservative bombthrower Sarah Palin sends a warning message to big-government liberals: “You thought pitbulls were tough? Well, you don’t wanna mess with the Mama Grizzlies!” The video celebrating Conservative women’s activism was released by Palin’s political action committee, SarahPAC. “It seems like it’s kind of a mom awakening in the last year and a half,” says Palin, as clips of women activists at political speeches and Tea Party rallies flash over the screen. “Where women are rising up and saying ‘No — we’ve had enough, already.’ Because moms kind of just know when something’s wrong.” The inspiring message in the video contrasts with attacks against Conservative women that are regularly launched by media and political figures on the left. In May, liberal talker Mike Malloy called Rep. Michelle Bachmann, R-Minn., a “phony-ass broad” and a “skank.” Last October, Keith Olbermann referred to Conservative columnist Michelle Malkin as “a mashed-up bag of meat with lipstick on it.” And last September, Ed Schultz dismissed the brilliant attorney and former State Department official Liz Cheney as “daddy’s little girl” — a reference to her father, former Vice President Dick Cheney.

Read more here:
Sarah Palin: ‘You Don’t Wanna Mess With Conservative Women!’

CBS’s Couric to Netanyahu: ‘Should You Be More Strongly Advocating’ on Obama’s Behalf?

In an interview with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Wednesday, CBS Evening News anchor Katie Couric noted President Obama’s unpopularity in Israel and pressed Netanyahu to remedy that fact: “To change public opinion in your country, should you be more strongly advocating on his behalf?” Couric preceded that question by citing a recent poll of Israelis, which she seemed perplexed by: “Can you explain this to me, then? In a poll conducted a month ago – just a month ago – 71 percent of the Jews in Israel surveyed said they dislike President Obama; 47 percent expressed a strong dislike.” Earlier in the interview, Couric tried to gauge Netanyahu’s feelings toward Obama: “Do you trust Barack Obama?…surely there have been disappointments with the Obama administration. Can you just be candid with me and tell me how the administration has disappointed you?” While Couric asked about Israeli “disappointments” with Obama, she never cited any specific Obama administration policies or actions as the cause of those disappointments. On Wednesday’s Good Morning America on ABC, co-host George Stephanopoulos repeatedly badgered Netanyahu on ways to improve the U.S.-Israel relationship, placing no responsibility on President Obama to repair the alliance: “One analyst said, this is a false calm. Suggesting that you can’t or won’t deliver what President Obama is calling for in the peace process. So, what concrete steps are you prepared to take?” Here is a transcript of the first part of Couric’s July 7 interview with Netanyahu: 6:39PM ET KATIE COURIC: In other news, it appeared yesterday that President Obama had accepted an invitation from Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to visit Israel. But today the White House said the trip, is, quote, ‘not on the books for this year.’ So have the two leaders really patched up their differences? That was part of the conversation when I interviewed the Prime Minister this afternoon here in New York. Do you trust Barack Obama? NETANYAHU: I trust Barack Obama, the President of the United States, to carry out with me the policies that have joined Israel and the United States in what Barack Obama has called the ‘unbreakable bond.’ We have common goals, common interests, and we now have a job to do to get on with our common goal of achieving peace with security. I trust we’ll be able to do that together. COURIC: While you want to accentuate the positive, clearly – that’s part of your mission here in the United States – surely there have been disappointments with the Obama administration. Can you just be candid with me and tell me how the administration has disappointed you? NETANYAHU: You know, you remind me of the Israeli press. They say ‘how come you had a good meeting with President Obama?’ Well, because I did. Because we actually see eye to eye on some central issues. The quest for peace, the danger of Iran, the need to bolster security for Israel and the region. That’s the truth. We do see it. Have we had differences? Of course we had. But I think some differences- COURIC: Some awkward moments? NETANYAHU: Yes, of course we had. So what? Even they are magnified and distorted. I think the President has a fine mind, and I can relate to it. COURIC: Can you explain this to me, then? In a poll conducted a month ago – just a month ago – 71 percent of the Jews in Israel surveyed said they dislike President Obama; 47 percent expressed a strong dislike. NETANYAHU: Well, maybe they don’t have the opportunity to have the kind of conversations that I had. And maybe they’re not aware, also, of the ongoing cooperation between Israel and the United States in the fields of security, intelligence. The fact that the Iron Dome program to protect against missiles is something that has been bolstered by this administration and by this president. We have a common goal to achieve a secure peace. I’m looking forward to working with him to achieve it. COURIC: Well, to change public opinion in your country, should you be more strongly advocating on his behalf? NETANYAHU: You know, I invited the President to Israel. I hope that he finds an appropriate time to come. I think that when people get to know him, and first lady Michelle Obama was very kind to my wife, they gave us a very warm reception. I hope I’ll be able to – we’ll be able to reciprocate in Israel.      COURIC: And later in this broadcast, what Prime Minister Netanyahu thinks the U.S. and Israel can do to curb Iran’s nuclear ambitions.

The rest is here:
CBS’s Couric to Netanyahu: ‘Should You Be More Strongly Advocating’ on Obama’s Behalf?

Media Ignore Planned Parenthood’s $1.3 Billion Federal Funding Discrepancy

If $1.3 billion is unaccounted for and the media don’t report it, did it really happen? According to an  American Life League review  of Planned Parenthood’s annual reports, the organization received more than $2 billion in federal grants and contracts between 2002 and 2008. A June 16 Government Accountability Report, however, found that the organization spent just $657.1 million of taxpayer money in the same time period. The $1.3 billion discrepancy failed to catch the attention of the nation’s major media outlets. None of the networks (ABC, CBS and NBC) or major newspapers (Los Angeles times, The New York Times, USA Today and The Washington Post) reported it. A Culture and Media Institute review of coverage found that only one newspaper listed among Nexis’ “major newspapers” – The Houston Chronicle – even mentioned the GAO report. The Chronicle’s June 16 article noted that Planned Parenthood spent $657 million of federal money over seven years, but did not mention the income/outlay discrepancy. Don’t Follow the Money The media have made Planned Parenthood a go-to source for several stories over the last six months, including debate over abortion language in health care reform legislation, the trial of the activist who killed abortionist Dr. George Tiller, and the 50 th  anniversary of the Pill. From Dec. 28, 2009, to June 28, 2010, the broadcast networks and the “Big 4” newspapers mentioned Planned Parenthood 56 times in news stories. None of those stories mentioned the GAO report, and only one article reported the amount of federal money going to Planned Parenthood. The February 27 article in The New York Times mentioned an investigative operation by pro-life activist Lila Rose which found Planned Parenthood clinics willing to accept donations from people who wanted African American babies aborted. A separate New York Times report on January 28 characterized the investigation as “prank calls” to Planned Parenthood. Four reports referred to state funding of Planned Parenthood, but did not mention federal resources granted to the organization. Planned Parenthood’s 2008 Annual Report says $349.6 million in taxpayer-funded grants and contracts accounted for more than a third (36 percent) of the organization’s income that year, second only to health center revenue.  Federal funding for Planned Parenthood has increased by 45 percent since 2001-2002, when it  received a reported  $240.9 million from taxpayers. While federal orders mandate that government money not be used directly for abortions, pro-life advocates point out that federal money used to cover non-abortion costs frees up private money to pay for abortions. Favorite Experts Planned Parenthood is by far the most cited pro-abortion group when it comes to national media coverage. In the last six months, 30 broadcast and print reports have quoted Planned Parenthood representatives and another 26 have mentioned the organization. The 56 mentions of Planned Parenthood dwarf other pro-abortion groups, including the National Organization for Women (30) and NARAL Pro-Choice America (15). When abortion was a major focus of health care reform debates, the media turned to Planned Parenthood President Cecile Richards and other affiliated representatives to statements and analysis. When the media celebrated the 50 th  anniversary of “the Pill,” the media commemorated Planned Parenthood’s role in making it possible. A February 26 profile in The Washington Post painted a glowing picture of abortion doctor Carol Ball. The article described a “difficult time” for Ball and other doctors who perform late term abortions in South Dakota. When Planned Parenthood produced an ad in response to Focus on the Family’s pro-life Super Bowl ad, the media praised it. USA Today noted it “defend[ed] abortion rights,” although the Focus on the Family ad did not target abortion “rights.”   The New York Times on January 27 turned to Richards on the increase in teen pregnancy rates, and she used the opportunity bash abstinence education. “This new study makes it crystal clear that abstinence-only sex education for teenagers does not work,” Richards said. In addition to news reports related to Planned Parenthood, newspapers published five letters to the editor from readers mentioning the organization and fives letters to the editor from Planned Parenthood executives. Another seven op-eds and entertainment reviews mentioned Planned Parenthood, as well as 15 death notices, and a couple of comedians’ jokes. All told, the networks and newspapers mentioned Planned Parenthood more than 80 times in the last six months. But when someone noticed a $1.3 billion discrepancy in Planned Parenthood’s handling of federal money – crickets. The Sound of Silence One letter to the editor in the Los Angeles Times February 7 illustrated the effect the media blackout has had on public perceptions of Planned Parenthood. Responding to the media-manufactured controversy over Focus on the Family’s pro-life Super Bowl ad, a reader wrote, “If I had it, I would give millions to Planned Parenthood to advertise on CBS during the Super Bowl.” Well, dear reader, your wish has already come true. You might not know it from reading the Times, but Planned Parenthood already receives more than $350 million every year from you and every other American taxpayer, with no oversight from the “watchdogs” in the media. Like this article? Sign up for “Culture Links,” CMI’s weekly e-mail newsletter, by   clicking  here.

Media ‘Feeding Frenzy’ Continues in Palin Coverage, Gainor Says

The video of journalists mocking Sarah Palin after a speech she delivered Friday is just the latest in a long line of media bias against the former Alaska governor and conservative superstar. An open mic caught reporters and photographers criticizing Palin following a speech at a fundraising dinner at California State University. “Oh my God,” one voice is heard saying, “I feel like I just got off a roller coaster, going round and round, and up and down. S*** flying out … everywhere.” While this video is among the clearest examples of media hatred for Palin, the trend goes back at least two years, according to MRC Vice President for Business and Culture Dan Gainor. “Back around the vice presidential debate in 2008 there were 37 negative stories on the broadcast networks, just two positive,” Gainor told “Fox & Friends” June 27. “It’s been a feeding frenzy ever since. Some of these journalists hate her so bad if she cured cancer they’d complain how many doctors she put out of work.” Gainor credited advances in technology with giving the American public a clearer picture of media bias in cases like the Palin video, Helen Thomas’ anti-Israel comments, and Washington Post blogger Dave Weigel’s anti-conservative e-mails. “What they’re discovering, and the key point is, their lies, their leaks, their embarrassing moments are going be to be held out there just like they’ve been doing to everybody else for decades,” Gainor said. “My parents would say, ‘What goes around comes around.'”

Read the original:
Media ‘Feeding Frenzy’ Continues in Palin Coverage, Gainor Says

Networks Snoozing on Hoyer Suggesting Dems Won’t Vote to Continue Bush Tax Cuts for Middle Class

Between the ongoing Gulf oil spill and the McChrystal row, this story is bound to get put on the back burner, but it still deserves attention by the broadcast and cable news media. Yesterday I wrote about the Washington Post burying its story on House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer saying that congressional Democrats were not wedded to President Obama’s 2008 campaign pledge to not raise taxes on anyone earning less than $250,000 per year. Asked about those remarks at yesterday’s White House press briefing , Robert Gibbs said he had not seen the comments and would “be happy to look at and try to get a response after this [briefing].” Hours later, The Hill newspaper’s Alexander Bolton filed a story that noted it’s not just Hoyer who’s staking out this position : Democrats are looking at the possibility of raising taxes on families below the $250,000-a-year threshold promised by President Barack Obama during the election. The majority party on Capitol Hill does not feel bound by that pledge, saying the threshold for tax hikes will depend on several factors, such as the revenue differences between setting the threshold at $200,000 and setting it at $250,000. “You could go lower, too — why not $200,000?” said Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.). “With the debt and deficit we have, you can’t make promises to people. This is a very serious situation.” Sen. Byron Dorgan (N.D.), chairman of the Senate Democratic Policy Committee, concurred, saying, “I don’t think there’s any magic in the number, whether it’s $250,000, $200,000 or $225,000. “The larger question is whether we’ll be able to extend the tax cuts for middle-income folks,” Dorgan said. “The answer, I expect, would be yes, but we don’t quite know how it all fits in the larger picture.” It’s certainly a compelling news story in a midterm election year. Thus far, however, the broadcast network morning shows and evening newscasts have ignored the story.

Read more from the original source:
Networks Snoozing on Hoyer Suggesting Dems Won’t Vote to Continue Bush Tax Cuts for Middle Class

watch dong yi ep 28

同伊28 dong yi episode 28 Details * Title: 동이 (同伊) / Dong Yi * Also known as: Dawn * Genre: Historical * Episodes: 50 * Broadcast network: MBC * Broadcast period: 2010-Mar-22 to 2010-Sep-7 * Air time: Monday Tuesday 21:55 Synopsis Set during the reign of King Sukjong in the Joseon dynasty, the story focuses on Dong Yi, a water maid who gains the trust of Queen Inhyeon and later the favour of the king when he is moved by her prayers for the health of the Queen during the court disputes cause

Excerpt from:
watch dong yi ep 28

FIFA 2010 World Cup South Africa Headband for Switzerland – 2010 …

2010 FIFA World Cup Fan Wigs & Headbands; Get Your Official Fan Wigs & Headbands for the 2010 FIFA World Cup South Africa While They Last! Celebrate the 2010 World Cup with a fashion forward headband at a reasonable price. …

Originally posted here:
FIFA 2010 World Cup South Africa Headband for Switzerland – 2010 …

2010 FIFA World Cup SOuth Africa – Algeria v/s Slovenia | MBC …

Live from Peter Mokaba Stadium Polokwane Broadcast date: Sunday 13th June, 2010 @ 15h20 on MBC 3.

Original post:
2010 FIFA World Cup SOuth Africa – Algeria v/s Slovenia | MBC …

Jerry Brown Calls Meg Whitman a Nazi, Media Mostly Mum

California’s Democrat gubernatorial candidate Jerry Brown on Tuesday called his Republican rival Meg Whitman a Nazi. You probably didn’t hear about this because America’s media largely ignored it.  By contrast, the press had a field day when Republican senatorial candidate Carly Fiorina made a comment about Barbara Boxer’s (D-Calif.) hair that was picked up by an open microphone Tuesday evening. Why the double standard? Consider your answer as you read what Brown told KCBS radio’s Doug Sovern (h/t NBer Gary Hall): Brown boasted about his legendary frugality. “I’ve only spent $200,000 so far. I have 20 million in the bank. I’m saving up for her.” It’s true – his stay-on-the-sidelines, bare-bones primary run cost him almost nothing, at least in California political terms. But he also fretted about the impact of all those eBay dollars in Whitman’s very deep pockets. “You know, by the time she’s done with me, two months from now, I’ll be a child-molesting…” He let the line trail off. “She’ll have people believing whatever she wants about me.” Then he went off on a riff I didn’t expect. “It’s like Goebbels,” referring to Hitler’s notorious Minister of Propaganda. “Goebbels invented this kind of propaganda. He took control of the whole world. She wants to be president. That’s her ambition, the first woman president. That’s what this is all about.” Sovern followed this up Thursday: The campaign of Meg Whitman has issued the following statement in response to the comments made by Jerry Brown, quoted in my blog posting “Run Jerry Run.” “Just last week, Governor Brown promised he wasn’t going to engage in mudslinging, but now he is comparing Meg Whitman to Hitler’s Minister of Propaganda, Joseph Goebbels. Jerry Brown’s statements comparing our campaign to a propagator of the Holocaust is deeply offensive and entirely unacceptable.” –Meg Whitman 2010 Campaign Manager Jillian Hasner Jerry Brown’s campaign spokesman, Sterling Clifford, confirms to the Associated Press that the conversation took place, describing it as “a discussion after a chance meeting while they were exercising. I wouldn’t vouch for the accuracy of it, but I also don’t want to dispute the accuracy of it. It was jogging talk taken out of context.” He says Brown was not comparing the Whitman campaign to Nazis. UPDATE: Friday afternoon, Jerry Brown issued the following statement: “I regret making the comments. They were taken out of context.” Pretty serious stuff happening in America’s most-populated state, wouldn’t you agree? Yet our media weren’t very interested. Although Politico reported this matter late Thursday evening, as did the Associated Press shortly after, the rest of our supposedly impartial press almost completed ignored Brown’s disgusting remarks. According to Google news and LexisNexis searches, the news divisions of by ABC, CBS, MSNBC, and NBC didn’t file one report on this subject through Friday evening. NOT ONE! I can also find no newspaper reports outside of California. Zero, nada, zilch!  Bucking the trend was Fox News during Friday’s “Special Report” and CNN’s Jack Cafferty giving it a mention on the same day’s “Situation Room.” By contrast, when Fiorina was caught on an open microphone saying that Boxer’s hair was “so yesterday,” the media had a field day. CNN has already done eleven reports on this vital matter impacting our nation. MSNBC’s done three. On the broadcast networks, NBC did three reports, ABC did two, and CBS did one. Those actually included a segment on ABC’s “World News with Diane Sawyer”    As for newspapers, the New York Times, the Washington Post, the New York Daily News, and the Houston chronicle all found Fiorina saying Boxer’s hair was “so yesterday” newsworthy.  I guess our media must think a Republican commenting about a rival’s hair is FAR MORE IMPORTANT than a Democrat calling a political opponent a Nazi. Boggles the mind, doesn’t it? 

Read the original post:
Jerry Brown Calls Meg Whitman a Nazi, Media Mostly Mum