Tea Party Coverage, or lack thereof

On April 15, 2009, I awoke with a feeling of culmination. Here it is. Our time has come to make our voices heard. I get online to check the MSM news outlets. I'm searching and searching and then it hits me: They are honestly refusing coverage. But how can this be? I mean, newsworthy things come in positive and negative forms. Certainly the MSM doesn't "like" to have to cover stories about the deaths of children because that is depressing, but it's news, and so they do their job. Certainly there are some in the MSM who favor traditional marriage (while this is not true of most of them), yet they earnestly covered the recent state decisions on gay marriage. If Jessica Simpson takes a bad photo and seems to have gained weight, THAT is newsworthy to every news outlet around.
If you've been hiding under a rock, or if you happen to be one of the few people who don't watch FOX news, you may never have even heard of a Tea Party. I'll give you a quick refresher course. As a tea party co-organizer, I think I have a bit of expertise on the subject. Many Americans are sick and tired of out of control government spending, runaway powers being added to governmental agencies that were not bestowed in the Constitution, and taxation without deliberate representation. It's really that simple. It is not an attack on President Obama. It is an attack on an abuse of power that has been brewing for a very long time, and from both sides of the aisle. We're mad at Republicans and Democrats alike. If we're "haters" I guess the good thing about that is that we are equal opportunity haters. MSNBC had no tea party coverage on its home page. However, for those interested, one can read about the new report which labels those against abortion or illegal immigration as "right-wing extremists." One can read about exactly how "gays won a marriage victory in the Midwest." One can even read about Bo, the President's new dog. Over on CNN, you've got to search for it, but you'll find a report from Howard Kurtz, entitled, "Who's Promoting Tax Protests?"


In the video, Kurtz proclaims that CNN is not covering the Tea Party Protests. He notes that none of his cohorts are covering the protests, other than FOX News. He seems to think that by actually reporting on the news, FOX is a "co-sponsor." So are we to surmise from this that MSNBC was a co-sponsor for the gay marriage passage bills? Are they also co-sponsoring American Idol and the President's new dog? No, I think not. I think that they were either amused or intrigued by the aforementioned stories, and they thought that the public would be as well. I think back to the protests of other groups that I've seen on the news and I can't for the life of me understand why it could be that any reputable news source would PURPOSEFULLY and DELIBERATELY not cover the Tax Day Tea Party Protests. I watch the above video and I see Howard Kurtz smirking and laughing in a knowing way when he describes how MSNBC's coverage has consisted of Rachel Maddow "making fun of this thing." He has the audacity--I like that word, it caused so many people to think that Obama was a genius, so I'll use it here--to state that the FOX News analysts, "said little or nothing about the huge deficits run up by President Bush..." and his aim is clear. He honestly thinks that if he can falsely convince the public that FOX News analysts didn't speak up with dissent under President Bush, then the droves of American citizens who are mobilizing, should be dismissed. Kurtz sums up his rant by acknowledging that Hannity, Beck, et al on FOX are "commentators who are paid for their opinions." As such, they are not obligated to give anything other than their opinions. Seeing the MSM outright ignore the protests has enraged the FOX News commentators, I'm thinking it's because they have this strange notion that NEWS should be covered by those employed by news outlets. The MSM has not only taken a deliberate stand on the sidelines on this issue, but they have gone out of their way to discredit and belittle average American citizens. No one is funding this movement. We are choosing to use our money to make phone calls, pay for gas, and make photocopies. Sure, FOX News is a news outlet, and as such, is covering the movement. You might have missed that day in Journalism school. Newt Gingrich may be lending his name and he may be encouraging like-minded people to act, but he is being supportive, not giving financial support. We demand that our voices be heard, NOW. I've heard it said by some of the MSM who are mocking us, "if this outrage is real and not staged, where were all of these people before now?" Some of us weren't involved. Some of us didn't care about politics. I, myself, didn't have much interest in politics because I just thought it was a network of "good old boys" and that they didn't care what I thought. I will be the first to admit that myself and others like me were ignorant. But guess what MSM? We're standing up now. Regardless of when the problems started, regardless of who is in office, regardless of who you think is promoting our cause...WE THE PEOPLE have woken up. So in closing, I'd like to issue a public "thank you" to the likes of MSNBC and CNN for dismissing us. You've only managed to make us that more determined. I guess you could even say that by your inaction, YOU are the true force that is guiding us.

A Vote For Obama Is A Vote For............President Bush?

For those of you who believe that John McCain will be the third term of George Bush, did you know that Barack Obama may be a George Bush too? There is a great article on CNN.com by Tara Wall. In the article Tara Wall describes 20 policies that Barack Obama has agreed with or supported President Bush. You can find the whole article here.

I thought I would share a few of the highlights.

3. Budgets: Obama voted for Bush's budgets, which included 19 spending bills.

**This is hardly surprising as this is one of the biggest Bush policies that Obama would likely continue. It is also one of the biggest thing I and most other fiscal conservatives will cringe at the most.

7. Energy: In signing the $12.3 billion Energy Policy Act of 2005, Bush said it "promotes dependable, affordable, and environmentally sound production and distribution of energy for America's future." Obama voted for the energy plan and called it a "first step toward decreasing America's dependence on foreign oil."

**Ironically this is the one that John McCain voted against because it gave too big of tax breaks to big oil companies......and yet Barack Obama had no issue voting for tax breaks for "Big Oil"......until he needed to run against big oil in his campaign rhetoric.

9. FISA: Of the Senate bill passage that rewrote intelligence laws to grant immunity to telecommunications companies that participated in the Bush administration's wiretapping program, Bush said: "This vital intelligence bill will allow our national security professionals to quickly and effectively monitor the plans of terrorists outside the United States, while respecting the liberties of the American people."

Obama, who supported it, after opposing FISA last year, said: "Given the grave threats that we face, our national security agencies must have the capability to gather intelligence and track down terrorists before they strike, while respecting the rule of law and the privacy and civil liberties of the American people." Almost identical, huh? Are we sure they don't share the same speechwriter? But Obama did take heat for his change of heart, as The Washington Post reported that: "The Illinois senator's reversal on the issue has angered liberal groups." Guess you can't please everyone.

**Isn't this the one big campaign promise that Obama made to his supporters in the primaries? This was one of the biggest issues that won him the nomination. Yet, he had no issue changing his position after securing the nomination. If he broke this promise to his most loyal supporters what will he do to the rest of us.

15. National security: Obama voted yes on preauthorizing the much ballyhooed Patriot Act, sought by the Bush administration.

**And yet another betrayal of his supporters. Isn't this one of the biggest reasons that liberals hate President Bush.


I don't want to be snarky on this issue, but there is such hatred for President Bush. I disagree with Bush's economic policies. I don't believe he handled the war as well as it should have been after we went in there. The fact is that you will never agree with everything any politician does, but you can always find something to agree on.

Sexism Is NOT The Problem, It's Ideological Bias Stupid!!

When Sarah Palin was first announced as VP, many people began attacking her personally. I know that her supporters have yelled "sexism". I, myself, felt that without a doubt sexism was an issue behind her attacks. However, I no longer think the attacks are sexist. I believe there is a much bigger underlying issue in the attacks, not just from the left, but from the media as well.

There is some sexism against her, but the core issue seems to be an ideological one, not a gender one. I have gone back and looked at some of the comments made about Palin in the media and on the blogs. They state that she is the anti-feminist and will bring down women. Why? Because as I have said in the past, liberals do not understand that their point of view can be an elitist one. I am a conservative, but I do not feel that my opinion speaks for everyone. Yet, if you read the attacks on Palin, those attackers feel that their point of view is the only point of view and Sarah Palin is the antipathy of those views.

Here are some examples in the media:

Campbell Brown of CNN questioned whether Palin could be a mother and Vice-President at the same time. At first glance you would think that she, as a woman, was being sexist. However, if you take a look at Campbell Brown's own life, you will find that is not the case. She is a mother of a small baby and has been working overtime as a CNN anchor during the campaign and political season. By questioning Palin's ability, she would have to question her own. Yet, it's not a female issue. It's an ideological one.

National Organization for Women states on it's own website that it is "taking action for women's equality since 1966". There is no way that this organization could be SEXIST right. That would stand against everything that they supposedly stand for. Yet, on their own website they have this posting: NOW PAC Chair Kim Gandy said, "Sen. John McCain's choice of Alaska governor Sarah Palin as his running mate is a cynical effort to appeal to disappointed Hillary Clinton voters and get them to vote, ultimately, against their own self-interest." Do I think they are sexist? No. Without a doubt this is an ideological issue. Apparently, NOW will now have to change it's name to NOLW or National Organization for Liberal Women because they no longer speak for those of us who are conservative.

Even during Charlie Gibson's interview with Palin, watching the disgust on his face at having to interview her was disheartening. Is Charlie Gibson sexist? For that matter, is ABC sexist. No. However, they do apparently take a left leaning turn at the ideological wheel. If you look at the parts of the interview with Palin that were edited out, you would think it was a completely different interview. You can read the full transcript here.
He misquoted her comment on sending the troops out on a mission from God. Is he a bad journalist? No, but is there a little bias in his interviewing?.....yes! You can compare the questions that Gibson asked Obama compared to those that he asked of Palin here. The bias is unmistakable.

Now does any of this matter to voters and to the election in general. The answer is yes. If the media that most Americans watch on a daily basis or read on a daily basis are openly showing their personal political views, how does the average American hear the truth? Good Luck. Even the NYT recently had to retract an article they had written about Palin that was false. Of course the retraction was three days later and placed on page seven.

I don't tell anyone who to vote for. You visit here knowing that I am Conservative and you will hear my point of view, but please make sure that you don't believe everything that you hear or read this election cycle. Great......now I am agreeing with Hollywood. Are pigs flying too?

CNN Sent Reporters To Alaska To Investigate.........Palin Children!!

We now understand why "normal" Americans never want to run for a National office. Is there anything that is off limits in our society today? I'm starting to believe that our country is being over taken by radicals and it is time for us to take it back.

What excites many of us about Governor Sarah Palin is that while others talk about being "one of us", she truly is seen as being one of us. Yes, she is new to the National political scene, but many of us have followed her career for months or in some cases years. She is not the normal career politician. (Biden) She does not come from a political family. (Clinton or even Bush) No, she didn't go to Harvard (Obama), but does that mean that if you didn't attend an Ivy League school that you are some how less of a human. She has normal life experiences just like the rest of us, as we found out today.

Like, Palin, I went to college. I have a degree. I have three children, not five. My children are too young for me to be involved in PTA, but I'm sure it is in my future. I am a mom and on the side I write this blog. I think of myself as smart (Smart Girl Politics...hello) and when I was in the "real world" I had an extremely successful career. I have thought about politics in the future, but after seeing what has transpired over the last few days, it is now highly unlikely. That is too bad. I have a lot to contribute.

This is why I look to Governor Palin as an inspiration. Yes, she is a woman, but as I have written before, I would not vote for someone JUST because she was a woman. I did not support Hillary Clinton, but I admired her effort. MSNBC's Andrea Mitchell said that only the uneducated Hillary Clinton supporters would vote for McCain/Palin. What does she say about the Obama supporters who when asked why they support him, say he represents "change". Does she question their education? Does she ask them what issues they agree with him on? Ask any Sarah Palin fan why they support her and you will get a laundry list and her being a woman wouldn't be one of them.

A CNN reporter live on air admitted that she and others were sent to Alaska to investigate the family and the CHILDREN of Governor Sarah Palin. Her family and children? What exactly are they looking for? Are the kids secret spies or did Willow spill her milk today? Have they investigated Barack Obama's two children? It's ridiculous and malicious. No, I am not saying Obama's children should be investigated. That would be absurd.

Today was an extremely sad day in American politics and it had nothing to do with a brave 17-year old girl who got thrown into a spotlight that should have been pointed in another direction. The only thing that all of this does is strengthen our support for Governor Palin, her family, and the McCain/Palin ticket in November.

Come on people, get smart.............start questioning your media sources........and our political system. We are the ones who should "change" this atmosphere.