Author Topic: Here you go 240 - just for you. Still think the MSM is not liberal?  (Read 1164 times)


240 is Back

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 102396
  • Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com
Re: Here you go 240 - just for you. Still think the MSM is not liberal?
« Reply #1 on: February 13, 2012, 04:41:58 AM »
WTF are you smoking on, this monday morning?

I've said for a long time that msn and friends are very much the obama re-election team.
i've said that FOX is the obama defeat team.

Neither side denies it... it's so obvious now.  Hell, look at the GOP primaries - 2 of the 4 guys left are FOX analysts, and fox has trashed the shit out of the other 2.  They are doing everything they can to get 'their guy' elected - an actual FOX employee LMAO.

i'd ask you to link where i said "no MSM bias exists..." but you can't do that.

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39450
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Here you go 240 - just for you. Still think the MSM is not liberal?
« Reply #2 on: February 13, 2012, 05:10:24 AM »

Media Matters also began a weekly strategy call with the White House, which continues, joined by the liberal Center for American Progress think tank. Jen Psaki, Obama’s deputy communications director, was a frequent participant before she left for the private sector in October 2011.


Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2012/02/12/inside-media-matters-sources-memos-reveal-erratic-behavior-close-coordination-with-white-house-and-news-organizations/#ixzz1mGcWFE4m

240 is Back

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 102396
  • Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com
Re: Here you go 240 - just for you. Still think the MSM is not liberal?
« Reply #3 on: February 13, 2012, 05:24:39 AM »
yes, and bush did it too.  it's how it works.  clinton probably did it too lol.

remember that photo op with hannity and friends assembling to plan their 2008 strategy?


geez, i can't believe we're still discussing politics 101 bullshit like this.

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39450
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Here you go 240 - just for you. Still think the MSM is not liberal?
« Reply #4 on: February 13, 2012, 05:27:35 AM »
yes, and bush did it too.  it's how it works.  clinton probably did it too lol.

remember that photo op with hannity and friends assembling to plan their 2008 strategy?


geez, i can't believe we're still discussing politics 101 bullshit like this.

Read the article - from there - MM filters its stuff to Abc, NBC, CBS, the tV stations, etc who claim to be unbiased. 

Hannity never claims to be anything but what he is.     

240 is Back

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 102396
  • Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com
Re: Here you go 240 - just for you. Still think the MSM is not liberal?
« Reply #5 on: February 13, 2012, 05:51:24 AM »
Read the article - from there - MM filters its stuff to Abc, NBC, CBS, the tV stations, etc who claim to be unbiased. 

So unless "240" has claimed they are unbiased.... why call out me int he thread title?  ???  I've said all along they are biased.

Maybe it should read "here you go ABC, NBC, CBS... just for you".

its' like you just want to have a boogeyman to argue with, when we're in complete agreement on this topic.

I may as well start a thread saing "Here you go 333386... still think boobies are no fun" and post a bunch of tit pics.  Then you will have to defend yourself.  sweet.

240 is Back

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 102396
  • Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com
Re: Here you go 240 - just for you. Still think the MSM is not liberal?
« Reply #6 on: February 13, 2012, 06:29:22 AM »
Here you go 33, I know you hate ice cream and hot sluts - Still think ice cream and hot sluts aren't cool?

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39450
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Here you go 240 - just for you. Still think the MSM is not liberal?
« Reply #7 on: February 13, 2012, 06:54:55 AM »
Is the White House manipulating the media through Media Matters?
Hot Air.com ^ | February 13, 2012 | Ed Morrissey





The Daily Caller has a multipart exposé on David Brock and Media Matters which will surprise … well, probably no one who reads this site. Speaking with former and current employees, Tucker Carlson, Vince Coglianese, Alex Pappas, and Will Rahn paint a picture of Brock as paranoid and out of control, but still supremely effective at getting his message out through the mainstream media:


Extensive interviews with a number of Brock’s current and former colleagues at Media Matters, as well as with leaders from across the spectrum of Democratic politics, reveal an organization roiled by its leader’s volatile and erratic behavior and struggles with mental illness, and an office where Brock’s executive assistant carried a handgun to public events in order to defend his boss from unseen threats.

Yet those same interviews, as well as a detailed organizational planning memo obtained by The Daily Caller, also suggest that Media Matters has to a great extent achieved its central goal of influencing the national media.

Well, in the interests of full disclosure, I often carry a handgun to public events — where it is legal to do so — thanks to threats that turned out to be real enough to prosecute. Then again, I’m not funded by gun-grabbers like George Soros, either. Given the personal attacks that Media Matters is given to making, I have no doubt that at least a few of their threats are not “unseen” as in “unreal,” but it’s more than a little hypocritical to carry around a concealed weapon (presumably illegally, especially in Washington DC) while supporting tougher gun-control regulations.


The DC has plenty of juicy and salacious anecdotes about Brock, but the real story is how successful Brock has become in shaping the narrative of the national media. MSNBC is a given, but it’s also become a hard-Left backwater. Media Matters has done better than MSNBC in setting the table:

But MSNBC executives weren’t the only ones talking regularly to Media Matters.

“The entire progressive blogosphere picked up our stuff,” says a Media Matters source, “from Daily Kos to Salon. Greg Sargent [of the Washington Post] will write anything you give him. He was the go-to guy to leak stuff.”

“If you can’t get it anywhere else, Greg Sargent’s always game,” agreed another source with firsthand knowledge.

Reached by phone, Sargent declined to comment.

“The HuffPo guys were good, Sam Stein and Nico [Pitney],” remembered one former staffer. “The people at Huffington Post were always eager to cooperate, which is no surprise given David’s long history with Arianna [Huffington].”

“Jim Rainey at the LA Times took a lot of our stuff,” the staffer continued. “So did Joe Garofoli at the San Francisco Chronicle. We’ve pushed stories to Eugene Robinson and E.J. Dionne [at the Washington Post]. Brian Stelter at the New York Times was helpful.”

“Ben Smith [formerly of Politico, now at BuzzFeed.com] will take stories and write what you want him to write,” explained the former employee, whose account was confirmed by other sources. Staffers at Media Matters “knew they could dump stuff to Ben Smith, they knew they could dump it at Plum Line [Greg Sargent’s Washington Post blog], so that’s where they sent it.”


Smith, who refused to comment on the substance of these claims, later took to Twitter to say that he has been critical of Media Matters.

However, their real success has been accessing the halls of power, especially the Obama White House:

A group with the ability to shape news coverage is of incalculable value to the politicians it supports, so it’s no surprise that Media Matters has been in regular contact with political operatives in the Obama administration. According to visitor logs, on June 16, 2010, Brock and then-Media Matters president Eric Burns traveled to the White House for a meeting with Valerie Jarrett, arguably the president’s closest adviser. Recently departed Obama communications director Anita Dunn returned to the White House for the meeting as well.

It’s not clear what the four spoke about — no one in the meeting returned repeated calls for comment — but the apparent coordination continued. “Anita Dunn became a regular presence at the office,” says someone who worked there. Then-president of Media Matters, Eric Burns, “lunched with her, met with her and chatted with her frequently on any number of matters.”

Media Matters also began a weekly strategy call with the White House, which continues, joined by the liberal Center for American Progress think tank. Jen Psaki, Obama’s deputy communications director, was a frequent participant before she left for the private sector in October 2011.

Every Tuesday evening, meanwhile, a representative from Media Matters attends the Common Purpose Project meeting at the Capitol Hilton on 16th Street in Washington, where dozens of progressive organizations formulate strategy, often with a representative from the Obama White House.

The actual story here might be the reverse of how Carlson et al frame it here. This sounds as though the White House uses Brock and Media Matters to conduct a proxy war against its perceived enemies in the news media and to push its propaganda out through the MSM. The DC’s descriptions of attacks on reporters and media outlets who don’t fall in line would make MMFA a very valuable pitbull for Jarrett and Obama, and one with some plausible deniability, at least until now. This should really be the screaming red flag in the article, rather than some of the salacious tidbits about Brock.


Interestingly, just a few days ago someone else connected the White House to Media Matters, along with a warning that their relationship could cost Obama the next election. The name of that right-wing nut? Alan Dershowitz:

Much more newsworthy than the silly spitballs Blumenthal threw with his screaming article was Dershowitz’s conviction that Blumenthal and his buddies at Media Matters (a media watchdog organization affiliated with the Democratic party and which has recently been widely accused of engaging in anti-Semitism) were going to cost this president the election.

Asked at the pre-event press conference whether he had seen Blumenthal’s article, Dershowitz’s immediate and angry response was: “I have, and let me tell you, Max Blumenthal and Media Matters will be singlehandedly responsible for [Obama] losing this election. They [the Democrats] cannot win the election and keep this affiliation with them [Media Matters].”

When shown this statement, all Blumenthal could muster (via Twitter) was that “I haven’t been at mmfa [Media Matters] since 2007.” It was pointed out that Blumenthal’s then-current Facebook page listed him as working for the “progressive organization Media Matters for America.” Blumenthal did not respond, but he has since altered his Facebook page so that only those “lucky” enough to be his FB friends can see it (although you can still look at the dozens of pictures he posts of himself there).


Dershowitz could be wrong, though. It might be that the only thing keeping Obama competitive for a re-election bid is Media Matters.


240 is Back

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 102396
  • Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com
Re: Here you go 240 - just for you. Still think the MSM is not liberal?
« Reply #8 on: February 13, 2012, 07:44:13 AM »
here you go, 333386.... Still think that Tide is the most presidential laundry choice?

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39450
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Here you go 240 - just for you. Still think the MSM is not liberal?
« Reply #9 on: February 13, 2012, 07:51:59 AM »
Remember when no one understood why ABC asked about contraception at the NH Debate? (Hmmmm alert)
Legal Insurrection blog ^ | 2/14/2012 | Prof. Jacobson




Remember when George Stephanopoulos, at the New Hampshire Republican debate on January 7, brought up and harped on whether the candidates thought states could ban contraception?


Everyone, at least on our side of the aisle, shook their heads in disbelief as to why Stephanopoulos was bringing up the issue. There was no active controversy over contraception, it wasn’t in the news, and there were far more pressing political issues, yet what seemed like an eternity of debate time was devoted to the subject at the insistence of Stephanopoulos.


It was, shall we say, something out of left field.

When Romney said, it’s working just fine, leave it alone, everyone laughed. [video at link--look at Romney being flabbergasted at the question]


Newt’s comeback was prophetic in hindsight. [Video at link, have to say, Newt's answer is superb]

Well what do you know, about a month later the Obama administration proposes administrative rules under Obamacare which would require free contraception be provided even by religious institutions which oppose contraception on religious grounds.

It’s almost as if Stephanopoulos got the memo first. Unless, of course, you believe in coincidences.



240 is Back

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 102396
  • Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com
Re: Here you go 240 - just for you. Still think the MSM is not liberal?
« Reply #10 on: February 13, 2012, 10:14:01 AM »
33, just for you... do you still think that dinosaurs riding sharks aren't totally awesome?

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39450
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Here you go 240 - just for you. Still think the MSM is not liberal?
« Reply #11 on: February 15, 2012, 09:24:28 AM »
Media Matters tax-exempt status may face new scrutiny from Congress
Daily Caller ^ | 02/15/2012 | Will Rahn

Posted on Wednesday, February 15, 2012 12:33:00 PM by Qbert

Congressional Republicans are now interested in examining Media Matters For America‘s tax-exempt status, The Daily Caller has learned. Doing so would cause the GOP to wade into the complex world of tax laws that govern “exempt organizations” such as Media Matters and more than 1 million other charitable organizations that are exempt from federal income tax.

Media Matters’ critics have questioned its tax-exempt status for some time. The Internal Revenue Service has a series of requirements that must be met before organizations can qualify. Successful applicants pay no federal income tax because the government presumes such charities perform services that benefit the public. Donors also may deduct their charitable contributions.

One central requirement before an organization like Media Matters can achieve the gold-standard nonprofit status — known by its place in the tax code, Section 501(c)(3) — is that it may not “attempt to influence legislation as a substantial part of its activities” or “participate in any campaign activity for or against political candidates.”

But the law, and how it is implemented, is complex.

“Tax benefits to charitable organizations are three-fold: exemption from federal income tax, tax-deductible contributions and tax-exempt bonds,” said Iowa Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley.

TheDC sought comment from Grassley before becoming aware that other members of Congress were talking about examining Media Matters’ tax status. “The standards for tax exemption deserve review as a matter of good stewardship on the part of Congress,” he said, “and should be considered as part of any comprehensive tax reform.”

The Fox News Channel, a frequent Media Matters target, has aired dozens of broadcast segments on the organization and its tax-exempt status. The stories often cite comments made by Media Matters CEO David Brock, who described his organization’s efforts against the news channel as “guerilla warfare and sabotage” in a 2011 interview with Ben Smith, then a reporter with Politico.

According to C. Boyden Gray, White House Counsel under President George H.W. Bush, Media Matters’ tax-exempt status, combined with its campaign against Fox News, amounts to taxpayers subsidizing broadsides directed at the cable news channel.

“I think there’s nothing wrong, generally speaking, with anyone attacking any news outlet,” Gray told The Daily Caller. “But whether it’s okay to get a tax subsidy for it, that’s another question.”

Gray also argued that Media Matters’ political activities are unique and differentiate it from similar research organizations on the right.

“[The] Heritage [Foundation] and the Media Research Center provide material, as does Media Matters, to networks about alleged factual inaccuracies,” Gray said. “That’s completely fair game and everybody does that. But I don’t think any of these other ones target individuals or engages in what is political training.”

The political training Gray refers to is the Media Matters “Progressive Talent Initiative,” a program designed to instruct left-leaning pundits on how to effectively bring the liberal gospel to the airwaves.

Gray said trainees could easily bring these newly acquired talents to Democratic campaigns, which he believes could be problematic for the legal status of their training organization.

“It seems to be only Democrats who get the training,” he explained.

Critics also point to Media Matters’ still mysterious calls and meetings with White House officials, which could prove problematic if the organization is privately sharing information with President Barack Obama’s staff.

“If a section 501(c)(3) organization is privately providing to the Democratic Party information for their use in their political activities, that’s a contribution to the party. Maybe not for FEC [Federal Election Commission] purposes, but certainly for IRS purposes, and would violate their 501(c)(3) status,” one tax law expert told The Daily Caller.

“If, on the other hand, they are compiling information and publishing it for anyone to use, including the Democratic Party, that’s a different thing.”

“But if they are privately providing something of value to the Democratic Party, that’s a revocation issue.”

If a tax-exempt organization were to publish the information but also provide it advance to a candidate, the expert continued, the issue becomes more complex but still arguably “grounds for revocation.”

Last July, Gray filed a formal petition with the IRS asking it to revoke Media Matters’ tax-exempt status. He argued that the organization’s campaign against the “commercial interests” of News Corporation, the parent company of the Fox News Channel, is not in keeping with its classification as an “educational” organization, and that its attacks against Republicans demolish the pretense that it is not explicitly partisan.

However, Marcus Owens, the former head of the Exempt Organizations Division of the IRS, told TheDC that Media Matters appears to still be acting within its rights as a 501 (c)(3) and pushed back against Gray’s argument that the tax exemption amounts to a subsidy in its “war on Fox.”

“The difficulty with that argument is that, if you look at the subsidies that exist in the internal revenue code, we’re all subsidized to one extent or another,” Owens said. “That’s where that argument, I think, ultimately falls apart.”

“And putting aside tax exemption, if you’re a corporation and you get a tax credit … you’re subsidized by the government as well.”

To lose its 501(c)(3) status, Owens said, Media Matters would likely have to have broken the relatively strict IRS financial rules about excessive compensation and transactions with related parties.

“The state of the political campaign proscription is in flux,” he said, because of the Supreme Court’s “Citizens United” decision regarding campaign financing. And while Owens said it would be conceivable for “speech that said ‘vote for’ or ‘vote against’ a candidate for an elected office would be sufficient” to strip the group of its preferred tax status, the IRS now tends to stop short of actually revoking 501(c)(3) status for such actions.

Because Brock has referred to Fox News as a political organization and the “de facto” leader of the GOP, Gray and other critics have argued that Media Matters is engaged in the kind of direct political activity forbidden by IRS regulations.

Experts contacted by The Daily Caller, however, point out that the regulations are generally not interpreted strictly enough to forbid such language, and that similar organizations are typically given a rather wide berth when it comes to interpreting the law.

Brock has also said Media Matters is intent on disrupting the “commercial activities” of News Corp. Chairman Rupert Murdoch. This could constitute a serious regulatory violation if any Media Matters donors compete with Murdoch.

While some of its contributors have been publicly identified, such as billionaire George Soros, Media Matters is not required to disclose its donors to the public and does not do so. Other groups run by Brock, such as Media Matters Action Network, and his American Bridge 21st Century super PAC, likewise to do not provide information about their funders.

When Brock announced the formation of American Bridge in 2010, his decision to rely on an undisclosed donor list was criticized even by erstwhile allies on the left, such as Washington Post writer Greg Sargent.

“The bottom line is that undisclosed donations are bad for democracy, period — whether coming from right or left,” Sargent wrote at the time. “Brock’s decision to try to beat the right at its own game is a sign that the big money power lefties have essentially given up, for the time being, on fixing the collapse of the campaign finance regime.”

Also troubling to Brock’s critics is the fact that American Bridge shares a Washington, D.C. office with Media Matters, on the sixth floor of 455 Massachusetts Avenue.

As a super PAC, American Bridge is not subject to the same rules that prohibit Media Matters from explicitly partisan activity. It can even do research for the Democratic Party. Brock is currently the chairman of both groups.

While an employee can legally work for both organizations, the time spent working for one or the other must be cataloged and is subject to IRS audit. But if Media Matters employees are directly working to support American Bridge with research or human resources, without being legally employed by the latter and providing the necessary paperwork, that could qualify as a serious violation.

Chip Watkins, an attorney who specializes in tax-exempt organizations at Webster, Chamberlain & Bean LLP in Washington, D.C., told The Daily Caller that it is rare for an organization like Media Matters “to actually have its exemption revoked.”

“The general rule is you can’t intervene in support of or opposition to someone who is running for elective public office. Unfortunately, beyond that, there are only a few things that are really clear.”

“The rules become very vague and very murky very quickly. And I’m not sure any lawyer can tell you this, that or the other thing violates the prohibition on campaign intervention.”

Gray, meanwhile, continues to challenge Media Matters’ tax-exempt status, while admitting that getting it rescinded will be an uphill battle.

“I don’t think there’s much of a precedent for this,” Gray said.

Alex Pappas contributed reporting to this story.


Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39450
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Here you go 240 - just for you. Still think the MSM is not liberal?
« Reply #12 on: February 17, 2012, 05:50:13 AM »
Is this Media Matters ‘favorite’ WashPost columnist?: Undisclosed group instrumental in promoting Obama’s political career.
Posted on February 16, 2012 at 11:36 PM EST

 
By Klein Online Staff

A Washington Post columnist to which Media Matters reportedly pushed its content has a previously undisclosed connection to President Obama – the two were part of a small group at Harvard University that met for a period of three years purportedly to promote involvement with U.S. community institutions.

Participants at the research project, which took place between 1997 and 2000, included scores of individuals with ties to Obama, including several activists who were later appointed to positions in the Obama administration.  Other participants were instrumental in promoting Obama’s political career.

As part of an in-depth investigative series into the embattled Media Matters for America progressive group, the Daily Caller earlier this week quoted a former Media Matters staffer as saying, “We’ve pushed stories to Eugene Robinson and E.J. Dionne [at the Washington Post]. Brian Stelter at the New York Times was helpful.”

Yesterday, Jacob Laksin, managing editor of Frontpage Magazine, noted seemingly consistencies between Dionne’s statements and Media Matters messaging.

In March 2007, Media Matters’ Eric Boehlert charged Republicans and Fox News were waging “a smear campaign against NPR.”

FrontPageMag noted that several months later, Dionne reprised the charge of a Fox News “smear campaign against NPR” during an appearance on NBC’s Meet the Press. Dionne further denouncedFox as a “Republican propaganda network,” echoing the charge of Media Matters founder David Brock, who famously claimed Fox was part of a “Republican noise machine.”

Dionne writes two highly liberal political columns per week for the Washington Post.

In one April 1999 piece entitled, “A World Safe For Socialism,” he issued an ode to to the socialist ideology.

Reporting on a Democratic Leadership Council forum attended by President Bill Clinton, British Prime Minister Tony Blair, German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder, Dutch Prime Minister Wim Kok, and Italian Prime Minister Massimo D’Alema, Dionne writes they “represent anything but old-style state socialism. All subscribe to versions of the ‘Third Way’ approach to politics that Blair and Clinton have been marketing and that the DLC was celebrating.”

Dionne praised the Third Way, saying it “gave liberals and, yes, socialists presentable new clothes to wear. The Third Wayers’ real challenge comes now that they hold power in so many places.”

The “Third Way” is an economic philosophy which called for business and government to join hands as “partners,” while recognizing that government intervention could not always correct the limitations of markets.

“Third Way” is an ideology first promoted as an alternative to free markets by Mikhail Gorbachev after the collapse of the Soviet Union. The “Third Way” of governing would be neither capitalist nor communist, but something in between.

In his 1998 State of the Union Address, President Clinton outlined the “Third Way”: “We have moved past the sterile debate between those who say government is the enemy and those who say government is the answer. My fellow Americans, we have found a Third Way.”

Discover the Networks criticized the theory: “In short, Big Business would own the economy (as under capitalism), while Big Government would run it (as under socialism). Corporations would be persuaded to comply with government directives through subsidies, tax breaks, customized legislation, and other special privileges.”

Harvard media project

Dionne was part of a small group at Harvard University that met for a period of three years purportedly to promote involvement with U.S. community institutions.  The group was called the Saguaro Seminars, a long-term research project aimed at significantly increasing Americans’ connectedness to one another and to community institutions.

The Sagauro project and its relationship with Obama was exposed in the recently released book “Red Army: The Radical Network that must be defeated to save America,” by reporters Aaron Klein and Brenda J. Elliott.

On Wednesday, KleinOnline reported another Saguaro project member is ABC News host George Stephanopoulos.

Saguaro’s signature effort was the 1997-2000 dialogue “on how we can increasingly build bonds of civic trust among Americans and their communities.” The dialogue resulted in a study being published in 2000 recommending Americans participate more with community groups.

In “Red Army,” Klein and Elliott detail how the idea for the Saguaro Seminars begins with author Robert D. Putnam, who is attributed with charting the “decline of civil engagement in the USA over the last 30 years or so.”

In a January 2001 review of “Bowling Alone,” David Moberg explains at In These Times, a socialist-style magazine, that Putnam defines social capital as connections among individuals and “‘community’ adapted to a large-scale capitalist society.”

Social capital, Moberg explains, is “more abundant in small communities than in big cities, but networks that constitute social capital develop in churches, unions, PTAs, neighborhood clubs, fraternal organizations and even bowling leagues (which have declined in the United States, thus ‘bowling alone’).”

“[At Saguaro Seminars] we find a number of people who have either been instrumental in promoting Obama’s agenda or have used their positions of influence on his behalf,” write Klein and Elliott.

In 1992 Obama served on the founding board of Public Allies, an organization dedicated to training a cadre of community organizers. Public Allies co founders Vanessa Kirsch and Katrina Browne, at Obama’s suggestion, interviewed his wife, Michelle Obama, to head a new Chicago office. Michelle Obama served as executive director from spring 1993 until fall 1996.

Obama left the Public Allies board when Michelle was hired, although he served on the Public Allies national board from 1997, when both he and Vanessa Kirsch participated in the Saguaro Seminars.

A second Saguaro Seminar member close to Obama is Rev. Bliss W. Browne. In December 1995, Browne’s United Imagination Network, also called Imagine Chicago, a collective of five elementary schools and one high school, was one of the first 35 school networks and their partners to receive school improvement funds from the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, or CAC.

The CAC was founded by former Weather Underground domestic terrorist Bill Ayers, who served as the group’s director. With Ayers, Obama served as president of the CAC board of directors from 1995 to 1999. He continued as a member of the board until 2002.

Also at the Saguaro Seminars with Obama and Stephanopoulos was Martha Minow, then-dean of Harvard Law School.

Minow is the daughter of Newton Minow, the former chairman of the FCC, who serves as senior counsel at the Chicago firm Sidley Austin. It was Martha Minow who reportedly recommended Sidley hire Obama for a summer job in 1989, after his first year of law school.

Martha Minow told Politico’s Carrie Budoff Brown in late August 2008, “So we were in the midst of one of our intensive discussions about civic engagement. … And after one of these ranging discussions, across the political sectors, he (Obama) did this tour de force summary. We just said, ‘When are you running for president?’ It became a joke. We started to nickname him ‘governor.’”

Obama named another fellow Saguaro Seminar member, Xavier de Souza Briggs, in January 2009 to serve as associate director of the White House Office of Management and Budget.

Briggs served as a team leader on the Obama-Biden transition team for the Department of Health and Human Services, Federal Housing Finance Board, and Interagency Council on Homelessness Review.

Also at Saguaro Seminars with Obama and Stephanopoulos was the Rev. Jim Wallis, publisher of Sojourners magazine.

Obama appointed Wallis as to his Advisory Council for Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships, where Wallis served a one-year term.

Obama and Wallis became close at the Saguaro Seminars, Eli Saslow wrote in January 2009 in the Washington Post. Wallis told Saslow: “We hit it off. We had very similar ideas about how faith could contribute to public life. He wanted that to be a major part of his career going forward.”

Wallis is a socialist activist who has championed communist causes and previously labeled the U.S. “the great captor and destroyer of human life.”

The Associated Baptist Press described Wallis as a “politically progressive evangelical and longtime advocate for the poor.” The Huffington Post identified him as a “Christian author and social-justice advocate.”

Wallis began his activism as a protester and then later Michigan leader of the Students for a Democratic Society, the 1960s anti-war group from which Ayers’ Weather Underground domestic terrorist organization splintered.

Sojourners’ official “statement of faith” urges readers to “refuse to accept [capitalist] structures and assumptions that normalize poverty and segregate the world by class.”

Discover the Networks notes how Sojourners originally formed a socialist commune in Washington, D.C., where members shared finances and launched anti-capitalist activism.

Saguaro Seminar member William Julius Wilson, meanwhile, also has ties to Obama.

“Red Army” relates that Wilson participated in the Feb. 25, 1996, town hall meeting on “Economic Insecurity” at the Ida Noyes Hall at the University of Chicago. The meeting, titled “Employment and Survival in Urban America,” was sponsored by the Chicago Democratic Socialists of America (DSA), University of Chicago DSA Youth Section and University Democrats.

Panelists for the meeting included both Wilson and Obama, who was then running for the 13th Illinois Senate District seat.

Wilson was a member of the National Advisory Council of the Social Democrats USA (SD/USA). Like the DSA, the SD/USA is a member of the Socialist International, the world’s largest socialist group.


Hugo Chavez

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 31866
Re: Here you go 240 - just for you. Still think the MSM is not liberal?
« Reply #13 on: February 17, 2012, 05:58:02 AM »
333, why did you call out 240 on this?  In the past 240 has actually defended Fox's right to be bias and recognized others in the media would play the opposite.  Why nail 240 on this?  Why call him out on this?  I really don't get it?  Based on 240's past statements on the media, you are clueless to what he's said?  WTF?

I'm willing to call out 240 when it's due but this ain't it.

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39450
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Here you go 240 - just for you. Still think the MSM is not liberal?
« Reply #14 on: February 17, 2012, 06:00:59 AM »
333, why did you call out 240 on this?  In the past 240 has actually defended Fox's right to be bias and recognized others in the media would play the opposite.  Why nail 240 on this?  Why call him out on this?  I really don't get it?  Based on 240's past statements on the media, you are clueless to what he's said?  WTF?

I'm willing to call out 240 when it's due but this ain't it.

I guess i read his comments differently. 

Hugo Chavez

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 31866
Re: Here you go 240 - just for you. Still think the MSM is not liberal?
« Reply #15 on: February 17, 2012, 06:34:54 AM »
I guess i read his comments differently. 
I opposed 240 on this stuff a few years back, you're barking up the wrong tree on this.  His past statements are the opposite of what you're suggesting.

240 is Back

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 102396
  • Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com
Re: Here you go 240 - just for you. Still think the MSM is not liberal?
« Reply #16 on: February 17, 2012, 07:02:47 AM »
I've said forever that the msm is in the tank for obama, ,fox is in the tank for the GOP, cnn is a bunch of drama queen d-bags, and that a round booty is a nice booty.

33, do you sitll think a round booty is not a nice booty? 

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39450
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Here you go 240 - just for you. Still think the MSM is not liberal?
« Reply #17 on: February 27, 2012, 10:45:39 AM »
Dershowitz declares war on Media Matters
Hot Air ^ | 2/27/12 | Ed Morrissey




Media Matters for America took a big hit to its credibility when Tucker Carlson and the Daily Caller ran a multiple-installment exposé of the political non-profit, which laid bare the group’s hypocrisy on gun control and, more problematically, their close coordination with the Obama White House. MMFA has managed to find itself in another bruising political battle, this time with Alan Dershowitz, a man normally inclined to support the Left. Dershowitz has pledged to personally make Media Matters an issue in the election by actively campaigning against anyone supporting the group:

Harvard Law Professor Alan Dershowitz, a leading Democratic lawyer who takes a hawkish line on Israel, has declared a personal war on the liberal group Media Matters, which has branched out into sharp criticism of Israel.

“Not only will [the Media Matters controversy] be an election matter, I will personally make it an election matter,” Dershowitz, a professor at Harvard Law School, told WABC’s Aaron Klein today.

Dershowitz has been sharply criticizing Media Matters for weeks, but suggested for the first time today he intends to drive the controversy into the political conversation.

“I don’t know whether President Obama has any idea that Media Matters has turned the corner against Israel in this way,” he said. “I can tell you this, he will know very shortly because I am beginning a serious campaign on this issue and I will not let it drop until and unless [writer and activist MJ] Rosenberg is fired from Media Matters, or Media Matters changes its policy or the White House disassociates itself from Media Matters.”

True to his word, Dershowitz takes his personal battle to the pages of the New York Daily News today, and minces no words:

It’s the kind of virulent hate speech


(Excerpt) Read more at hotair.com ...


240 is Back

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 102396
  • Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com
Re: Here you go 240 - just for you. Still think the MSM is not liberal?
« Reply #18 on: February 27, 2012, 10:49:47 AM »
333386, Still think Markus Ruhl doesnt have big arms?  just for you...

Straw Man

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41015
  • one dwells in nirvana
Re: Here you go 240 - just for you. Still think the MSM is not liberal?
« Reply #19 on: February 27, 2012, 11:34:42 AM »
Fox can make Media Matters irrelevent

If Fox would just stop airing false information then Media Matters would have nothing to do


Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39450
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Here you go 240 - just for you. Still think the MSM is not liberal?
« Reply #20 on: February 27, 2012, 11:37:43 AM »
Fox can make Media Matters irrelevent

If Fox would just stop airing false information then Media Matters would have nothing to do



What does that have to do with MM having weekly meeting with Obama Admn to spread bullshit to the media and public at large? 

Straw Man

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41015
  • one dwells in nirvana
Re: Here you go 240 - just for you. Still think the MSM is not liberal?
« Reply #21 on: February 27, 2012, 11:46:46 AM »
What does that have to do with MM having weekly meeting with Obama Admn to spread bullshit to the media and public at large? 

what bullshit ?

and seriously

since when has that mattered to you?


Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39450
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Here you go 240 - just for you. Still think the MSM is not liberal?
« Reply #22 on: February 27, 2012, 11:48:36 AM »
what bullshit ?

and seriously

since when has that mattered to you?



99% of the propaganda from obama admn and MM is pure bullshit.   And i have cared from Day 1 when this Mugabama ascended to the throne.   

Straw Man

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41015
  • one dwells in nirvana
Re: Here you go 240 - just for you. Still think the MSM is not liberal?
« Reply #23 on: February 27, 2012, 11:49:50 AM »
99% of the propaganda from obama admn and MM is pure bullshit.   And i have cared from Day 1 when this Mugabama ascended to the throne.   

and 100% of your beliefs about Obama are pure bullshit

carry on

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39450
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Here you go 240 - just for you. Still think the MSM is not liberal?
« Reply #24 on: February 27, 2012, 11:51:04 AM »
and 100% of your beliefs about Obama are pure bullshit

carry on

Name one.