Liberal media narrative pushing alternate reality on western society

An example of a conservative commentator trashed by the liberal media.

Like a lot of people who like to think for themselves, I am sick and tired of the 24/7 narrative coming from the liberal mainstream media and like-minded politicians that anyone who holds traditional conservative views is hateful in every respect, or in the case of Sean Hannity above, bad for America.

Yes, that is biased and narrow-minded thinking but what is especially problematic about it is that it is pushing an alternate reality onto Western society. I mean, when I turn on the CBC (which isn’t often) it is like the journalists and commentators are living in a different country than I am. Which is probably why I watch a lot of Fox News these days. At least there, for the most part, you get a balanced presentation. I mean, they always have both Republican and Democratic pundits on to debate the issues.

Anyway, this week the American media published an old quote from U.S. Vice- President Mike Pence — that he didn’t have lunch with women other than his wife . You would have thought he was some kind of monster given the hysterical response. The assumption was that he had to be anti-woman. Nonsense. All of it. From what I have read, Pence is surrounded by competent women.

Then, there is Brexit across the pond. In the UK, the “leavers” are called every negative name that can be said publicly on the BBC. It is as though the 52% who voted for Brexit are from another planet. Never mind that those 52% were simply tired of having no borders or their laws overridden by Brussels.

Similarly in the US, nearly half the country voted for Donald Trump and yet, those pockets of Democratic blue feel because they represented the popular vote, they should run the country regardless of Electoral College rules and the U.S.Constitution. In fact, Democratic outrage is off the charts. Yet, just imagine if the vote had been the reverse and Hillary Clinton had won the College vote and Trump the popular vote. Who do you think would be president right now? Right. Clinton.

Years ago, I experienced this kind of social and media bias first hand. I had helped an Ontario PC (Progressive Conservative) candidate win the 1995 provincial election. He was a member of the Mike Harris Conservative caucus. I accompanied him, his wife and their family to the swearing-in ceremony two weeks after the vote. What greeted us were thousands of protesters and a bomb scare — and the Conservatives hadn’t even done anything yet. Nevertheless, for the entire four years of Harris’ first mandate, the protests and the media were hysterical about everything in spite of the fact that Ontario boomed — with 100,000 people able to get off welfare and nearly one million good paying full time jobs being created.

Speaking of protests, in the U.S. when you watch the tape of the Berkeley fiasco, it is the professor who is screaming profanities. Same at Middlebury College where even a professor was injured. Sure, I don’t agree with much of what Milo Yiannopoulos or Charles Murray say, but so what? They should be able to talk freely and students and faculty should be able to debate why they disagree with them. Causing and allowing mayhem, on the other hand, is simply teaching young adults that temper tantrums work.

Which brings me to Canada and its liberal media snowflakes. For ten years we read and heard that the Stephen Harper Conservatives were bad and Harper was a dictator. Why? Because one of his staffers had the gall to pay $90,000 back to the public treasury to help a Senator that the media didn’t like because he had been one of them and, in their opinion, didn’t know his place.  As with Mike Harris twenty years ago, there was little mention in the media about how much the Conservative Government was accomplishing.

Yet, now that we have the Justin Trudeau Liberals in power, as with Obama in the U.S. when he was in power, the media fawning never stops.  There are scandals every single day and the media reports on them. However, given the image to the left, the venom they saved for Harper just isn’t there for Trudeau.

The crux of the matter is that the media and liberal narrative that anything we say that disagrees with a liberal worldview should be considered “hate speech” or “bad” for our country is a view that we have to fight 24/7. How? By debating ideas with family, neighbours and friends or by volunteering for a conservative oriented politician.

Anti Trump & CPC leadership media bias in Canada & US


Click for image.

The media and Left inspired nastiness regarding all things Trump and conservative politics these days is horrendous and non-stop.

Turn on the TV or your Twitter feed or pick up any newspaper, and the headlines say it all.

For example, on Twitter I read that a Liberal MP believes that Canada’s Conservative Party was responsible for the Quebec Mosque massacre. Politicizing the deaths is, of course, disgusting. Luckily former Conservative Immigration Minister, Jason Kenney, corrected that faulty information.

As well, I have read and heard for months now,  that Conservative Leadership Candidate Kellie Leitch is anti-Canadian because she wants to vet newcomers from Muslim countries.

Of course, anything I hear or read about President Trump I take with a grain of sale — such as his latest behaviour at his most recent Press Conference. The media said he was unhinged whereas I thought the reverse.

Blah, blah, blah.


Click for image.

In the US of course it is anti-Trump 24/7. In fact, I don’t think it is an exaggeration to say that the mainstream journalists there are the ones who are “unhinged.”

President Trump is simply a showman, always has been and always will be.

Trump is also not beholden to anyone for anything. As a result, the media need to get used to him “telling it like it is” because it is his authenticity that supporters like about him.

As to Kellie Leitch and the Canadian Conservative Leadership campaign, there is, unfortunately some nastiness going on within the campaign. As I wrote here, Leitch has been attacked by several of her fellow Conservative leadership candidates, including Lisa Raitt.

In any event, while I like Leitch, I am leaning towards Andrew Scheer. Why? Because he is a young family man, much like PM Trudeau. As a result, I believe the media’s comparison to the current PM will be more favourable.

Scheer is also not going to be controversial because he is a known personality, having been Speaker of the House of Commons. Besides, in my opinion, Scheer is most like a young Stephen Harper. Meaning, while he does not glow with charisma, he has experience and statesman-like dignity.

The crux of the matter is that I will leave this thread open to provide a space where regular readers can discuss and debate the CPC leadership contest in the weeks and days leading up to the May 2017 vote.

Page separator

Endnote: If readers want to find this site after early May, 2017, I would recommend they change your “favorites list” for CotM to soon as I don’t plan on renewing in August, 2017. Similarly, the domain will expire in the near future because it has not worked for some time now due to the “dashes” between words.

Trump’s inauguration numbers prove conservatives must fight dishonest media

screenshot-inaugurationThe photo image to the left is of the actual crowd that viewed Donald J. Trump’s inauguration speech on Friday, January 20th at approximately 12 noon. In other words, the National Mall in Washington was packed.

Yet, right after the Trump inaugural address, tweets started coming out that claimed the Obama 2009 numbers were significantly higher than the Trump 2017 numbers.

The double image below is indicative of that early claim. While you can’t move my image, here is the CNN link to do so. How long that image remains online I don’t know but it was there when I wrote this.

Click for the actual CNN comparison.

Click for the actual CNN comparison.

Anyway, I retweeted repeatedly that the 2017 image was taken around 9 or 9:30am in the morning. I knew that because I had my TV on all day and personally saw that view at around that earlier time period.

That inaccurate image stayed on Twitter and the Internet for a couple of days — allowing thousands if not millions to call Trump a liar — until CNN released this gigapixel image which began to prove the truth about the actual numbers.

Interestingly, today CNN released (H/T Gateway Pundit) another set of images which, once and for all, shows that as many people heard the Trump inauguration speech in 2017 as those who heard Obama in 2009. In fact, it could be argued that even more heard Mr. Trump.

Unfortunately, such anti-conservative bias is not new to conservative Canadians. For ten years, the entire time the Stephen Harper Conservatives were in power, I wrote about what we called the Harper Derangement Syndrome. It now seems obvious that the US is experiencing a similar Trump Derangement Syndrome.

Which means that whether you live in the U.S. or Canada, conservatives are believed to be bigoted, racist and intolerant.

On Saturday, for example, a Conservative Rebel Media journalist was roughed up at a women’s rally in Edmonton — by a so-called male feminist who was then hustled away by so-called female feminists. Watching the speeches and mayhem in Washington also showed just who is truly intolerant.

In other words, the very hateful words screamed at conservative women, particularly pro-life women, is a reflection of the hateful intolerance of any point of view that is not the one held by progressives and liberals.

The odd thing is today’s feminists are not really feminists. In the 1960s many of us now of retirement age, fought for equality and choice for both men and women. Real choice. Not one point of view.

  • Women could choose to work in the home full time.
  • Women could choose to get a job.
  • Women could choose to go back to school.
  • Women could choose to have children and work.
  • Men could choose to be the one to stay at home if they wanted.
  • And, women could choose to take birth control pills because they were then accessible.

In the early days of feminism, we also didn’t call abortion a right to “reproductive choice” because that is what birth control was. Remember, prior to the “pill,” women did not have much control over whether they got pregnant, something young women today forget or don’t know.

Anyway, this is all connected in that progressives and liberals hate anyone who doesn’t think like they do and that includes the similarly minded mainstream media.

So, what can conservative thinkers do? They can:

  • Read conservative oriented news sites,
  • Write on or start a conservative blog,
  • Comment regularly on Twitter and conservative blogs,
  • Get involved in the Conservative Party of Canada (CPC) Leadership contest,
  • Join and volunteer in a CPC riding association, and
  • Donate money to the CPC directly or a leadership candidate.

In other words, the crux of the matter is that the best way to fight the dishonest liberal media is to ignore them as Mr. Trump does and get involved in conservative politics — whether you are a former reform conservative, a progressive conservative or a conservative leaning libertarian.

Is political correctness frightening Canada’s conservative leaders?

happy-canadian-beaverI am getting sick and tired of Ontario’s Patrick Brown and most of the federal Conservative leadership candidates shrinking at media condemnation of the conservative principles they supposedly believe.

I mean, Kellie Leitch can’t even talk about wanting newcomers to our country to be screened for such values as freedom of speech and gender equality, without being labelled a racist and a bigot.

Yet, thankfully Leitch doesn’t shrink from those firmly held beliefs. Follow her on Twitter and you will see what I mean. The woman has courage.

In other words, what I am talking about is the need for conservative leaders in this country to have the courage of their convictions even while under opposition and media fire.

Yet, at the moment, the opposite seems true. For example, Sam Oosterhoff was recently elected in Niagara West-Glanbrook for the Tories.  His leader, PC Leader Patrick Brown had him wait an extra day to be sworn in because Oosterhoff planned to vote against Bill 28. Why? Because the Bill, which was to make it easier for Lesbian and Gay couples to have children, did not include the words “mother” and “father.”

What did Brown fear? Was he concerned that one of his caucus might be labeled a social conservative? Probably.  Read this column from iPolitics, for example, about how social conservatives need not apply to be nominated a PC candidate. Obviously, Brown did not expect Oosterhoff to beat Rick Dykstra in Niagara. Ah, such is democracy!

Now I come to those running for the CPC leadership to replace former PM Stephen Harper.  It is just like a contagious disease. Just as in Ontario, federal Conservative leaders are constantly whining about political correct issues and their attacks on Leitch are unseemly to say the least. The reality is that Canada doesn’t need or want Liberal-Lite Conservative leaders anywhere in this country.

Which reminds me. All we heard from the media after the Trudeau Liberals won in October 2015 was about the nasty hateful tone that the Harper Conservatives had encouraged. Absolute nonsense! Just listen to the hate being thrown at US Republicans and you will know who really was responsible for the negative tone in Canada’s House of Commons and it wasn’t the Conservatives!

The crux of the matter is that Canadian conservatives need leaders that they can support. Just as Jason Kenney is doing in Alberta and Brad Wall in Saskatchewan, conservatives across this country need to know what Conservative leaders would do differently from their Liberal or NDP counterparts.

Yes, I get letters nearly everyday in my inbox from the federal candidates and ONPC Leader Patrick Brown. In the former, even including Leitch and Max Bernier, I have yet to hear a vision that could beat Justin Trudeau in 2019 and one that I can support on this blog.

Trudeau Liberals & CPC leadership candidates misread Trump win at their peril

trump-wins-the-us-electionI found it interesting that Canada’s current Prime Minister, Justin Trudeau, our selfie and sunny ways PM, thinks he will get along with U.S. President Elect Donald Trump, no problem.

Talk about naivety and arrogance!

In fact, just visualizing the two of them together makes me smile — a mature accomplished billionaire versus a trust-fund middle aged man who got to be our PM because of his last name and through the same type of media manipulation that the U.S. media used for Barack Obama — but failed to do for Hillary Clinton.

However, most of the Canadian media doesn’t seem to have learned anything from the Trump vote result. For example, I watched Rosie Barton (who I like) and her Power Panel on CBC’s Power and Politics last night just to see what they took from the Trump election result.

Well, her liberal and progressive partisan guest panelists (Ian Capstick and Amanda Alvaro) seemed to be absolutely gob smacked. Tim Powers, the token conservative on the panel, did well however, explaining what the Trump could mean for Canadians. But Capstick seemed to have an overblown emotional breakdown right there on live TV. In fact, Rosie herself seemed positively stunned and seemed to tear up when she watched a few seconds of Hillary Clinton’s concession speech.

Good grief! The sky in North America is not falling!

Interestingly, I can still remember that some of those same panelists constantly suggested, even after they got a majority in May of 2011, that the Harper Conservatives were illegitimate because they only had 39.6% of the popular vote.

Yet, somehow the Liberals under Justin Trudeau received a “mandate” to do whatever they want — including completely changing the way we vote —  with 39.5% of the popular vote — a point less than the Conservatives got.

It’s called bias and intolerance because liberals and progressives truly believe they are right about everything. So, anyone who holds a different vision to theirs is unjust, racist, misogynist, bigoted, narrow minded and hateful.

Meaning, that when anyone holds a different view, they are supposedly guilty of spewing hate speech. For example, Vox writes that the Globe and Mail actually wrote a “Dear America” piece asking Americans not to vote for Donald Trump. And, I have heard that some university students in California had to skip classes they were so upset.

Good grief! As a former academic all I can do is scratch my head. Do their professors not teach them how to debate any more? Obviously not.

True, Trump has made lewd comments. But all the complaints against him regarding sexual misconduct are allegations and nothing more — complaints alleged to have been instigated by the Democratic National Committee.

Regardless, in spite of those questionable complaints, millions of American women voted for Trump because of his message of hope for jobs, as well as his rejection of elites and insiders. Frankly, I also think the women who voted for Trump looked at his children and figured the way they turned out was more of a true measure of the man than off hand comments he made years ago.

Anyway, the metaphor that comes to mind regarding that kind of liberal peripheral blindness is a group of horses with blinkers on hauling a large group of people in a wagon. Since the horses can only look straight ahead and don’t see what is actually going on around them or what is happening to the people in the wagon, they push ahead regardless.

Which brings me to the current lackadaisical Conservative leadership race. Apart from Kellie Leitch, who is thankfully ignoring a trashing by the Canadian media for her stance on Canadian values, most candidates seem oblivious to the reality that what conservative leaning Canadian voters want —  a leader that is VERY different from Trudeau. Yet, read this Brampton Guardian piece and it seems that what bothers most of the CPC candidates is not what the Liberals are doing but fear of offending anyone.

The crux of the matter is that I am sick and tired of liberals crying shame whenever a woman openly supports Trump. I am also sick and tired of PM Trudeau and his caucus claiming they have a mandate to do whatever they want and the Canadian liberal loving media usually agreeing with them.

Millions of Canadian conservatives are watching and waiting. Whether it be the First Passed the Post voting system (FPTP) or some other Canadian system, 2019 can’t come soon enough! I can only hope that the CPC leader elected in 2017 is ready to do and say what is necessary to win.

Page separator

Endnote: Welcome Jacksnewswatch and NewsWatchCanada readers. Want to read a liberal media hatched job on President Elect Trump? Read Andrew Coyne’s column in today’s National Post.  I used to like Coyne’s columns but unfortunately he has become a liberal shrill.

U.S. liberal media destroying democracy with “Yellow Journalism”

New York Times Screenshot 1030It’s anti-Donald Trump versus pro-Hillary Clinton 24/7. As with the left-leaning media in the U.K. recently trying to affect the Brexit vote outcome, which they lost, the majority of the left/liberal media in the United States are involved in their own election campaign.

How? Through a type of sensationalized reportage called Yellow Journalism which was made famous in the late 19th century by New York City publishers Joseph Pulitzer and William Randolph Hearst. It is reportage that exaggerates, is not too worried about the facts and tells only one side of a story.

Fast forward to 2016. The purpose for the liberal media’s yellow journalism now is to make sure Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton gets elected and, in so doing, making sure Republican candidate Donald Trump does not. In doing so, ridicule seems to be the main strategy.

Take for instance my featured image of a 1998 New York Times column on Yellow Journalism. Oh, the irony! On the left side is the 1998 column. On the right side are a running list of today’s headlines. The first is “Donald Trump’s Draft Deferments: Four for College, One for Bad Feet.” Another is “How the ‘Stupid Party’ Created Donald Trump.”

The underlying media message in that approach? Democracy be damned!

Yes, I am Canadian. But, living so close to the U.S. border in Niagara, and having so many American friends, I am very much tuned in to American politics. And, if not for such conservative news outlets as Fox and Breitbart, little would have been heard or read this side of the border. In fact, the CBC and the private networks tend to only report positive news about Clinton and negative news about Trump. And so it seems, Canadian networks want Clinton elected as well.

Anyway, my apologies for this post being long, but here are a few examples of left/liberal media group think and yellow journalism, both during and after the Republican (RNC) and Democratic Conventions (DNC).

(1) At the DNC Convention, most of Bernie Sanders’ supporters were outraged that he endorsed Clinton without so much as a complaint and the left/liberal media did not say or write much about their anger — compared to how they reported all disagreement expressed at the RNC Convention. Little was also said or written about the #DNCleaks and how the DNC had been doing their utmost during the entire primary season to sabotage Sanders.

(2) It was only after the close of the DNC Convention that I saw the video of the one minute of silence for the fallen police officers. During that minute, Black Lives Matter chants were heard in the background. BLM were also protesting outside the Convention but very little was said in the left/liberal media about those protests.

(3) At the DNC Convention Vice-President Joe Biden said it was a bunch of malarkey that Trump cared about working people. Like, who is he to judge? How does he know? Had Trump made a reverse charge, the liberal media would have been all over him to prove his statement.

(4) Then, there is the issue of honouring those who have died in the service of their country. First, Pat Smith, mother of the U.S. Ambassador to Libya, Christopher Stevens, who was murdered when Hillary Clinton was Secretary of State, spoke at the RNC Convention. I read nothing positive in the liberal media after her talk. In fact, it has been said that Clinton called Smith a liar. Can you imagine how the Democratic friendly media would react if Trump had called anyone a liar?

(5) However, when Khizr Khan and his wife, who lost their son (Army Captain Humayun Khan) in Iraq, criticized Donald Trump for wanting to limit Muslim immigration from certain countries, the media pounced on Trump with a vengeance and they treated the Khans with a reverence they did not give Smith.

In my opinion, the politicization of the younger Khan’s death was disrespectful to his memory as well as unnecessary. He died a hero in Iraq as a result of a car bomb being detonated by two suicide bombers — a horror for his parents certainly but totally unrelated to what Americans are experiencing in 2016. However, I believe Ray Starmann explains the current reality facing Americans today best in his open letter to Mr. Kahn (H/T NewsWatchCanada).

(6) Yet, when DNC pro-Clinton speakers said they would keep America safe, little was heard or read in the left/liberal media about how many, if not most, Americans do not feel safe right now, given how many Americans have died at the hands of Islamic extremists. For example, Americans not only died abroad during the past few years, but in San Bernardino, California, Orlando, Florida and Fort Hood, Texas as well. In other words, Americans know that Americans are dying at the hands of lone wolf Islamic extremists at home. However, it was like everyone who had anything to do with the DNC Convention was in denial of that reality — including and most especially President Obama.

(7) Then yesterday, the New York Post published nude photos of Trump’s wife, Melania, with the headline Ogle Office. (H/T Jack’s Newswatch) The underlying message? She is a tramp and unworthy to be the First Lady. Why such misogyny and sexism related only to Trump? What about Bill Clinton’s behaviour with women not his wife?

Of course, there is actually a solution to the current increase in Yellow Journalism in the U.S. It may be naive to suggest, but that media, both liberal and conservative, could report the news and facts on both candidates fairly, no matter how positive or negative those facts are. The result? American voters would be able to make informed decisions about who to vote for in November.

What Canada can learn from #DNCleaks re media bias & collusion

Philly protest via NWC 1030There is no doubt about it. Canadians can learn something from the #DNCleaks about pro-liberal bias and collusion between political organisations and the media.

The Merriam Webster dictionary describes bias as “a tendency to believe some peoples ideas are better than others” and “collusion” as “secret co-operation for a dishonest purpose.

And, thanks to those leaks, we now know beyond a shadow of a doubt that staff and officials at the U.S. Democratic National Committee (DNC), have shown repeatedly that they were biased in favour of Hillary Clinton (over Bernie Sanders) and had secret co-operation with certain mainstream journalists.

Certainly, the U.S. is not alone in that regard. I mean, I have frequently wondered if there was collusion between the Liberal Party of Canada and the CBC. During the 2015 federal election campaign, for example, I used to compare media releases on the LPC website to what I heard on TV and read in print.
Continue reading

Judith Miller on left-leaning media as liberal propaganda machines

Judith Miller 1030Western democracy is at risk because mainstream journalism has become nothing more than a propaganda machine for all things progressive and liberal. And, it has happened so slowly that those in their 20’s and 30’s today don’t even realize the extent they are being brainwashed.

They are being brainwashed into thinking that everything progressive-liberal is correct and everything conservative is wrong. End of story. Well, it should not be the end of the story because true democracy requires debate and discussion.

The good news is that some current mainstream journalists are attempting to wake us up regarding this one-sided philosophical reality. One of them is former New York Times writer and Pulitzer Prize winner, Judith Miller.

Like Margaret Wente in Canada, progressives who disagree with what she has written, look for ways to vilify her.  Regarding Wente, for example, check out Terence Corcoran’s column about the latest pile-on (H/T NewsWatchCanada).

In Miller’s case, she learned about truth in media the hard way. Both before and after the 2003 Iraqi invasion, she wrote in the Times that Iraq had a stockpile of weapons of mass destruction (WMD’s). Of course, when no WMD were subsequently found, she was severely blamed for the misinformation, even though she was using the same intelligence sources as U.S. government analysts at the time.

So, it comes as no surprise to me that she has just released a book about the lack of truth in today’s journalism.

While I haven’t read Miller’s book yet, I have no doubt what she says is true given the current progressive-left-liberal bias that I have personally experienced as a conservative leaning blogger for a decade.

For example, during an interview at Newsmax, Miller says: (H/T Jack’s Newswatch):

“‘Be very skeptical of everything we in the press say. That even the most respected, reputable organizations do things that are often times contrary to the truth and that they ought to question everything they hear from everyone … I wanted to take people inside journalism and to make them understand what a really shabby shape the profession is in today.'”

Thankfully, yes, there are some journalists in Canada today who are true professionals and I have linked to one of them in this post. However, he and others like him are the exceptions (like Rex Murphy and Christie Blatchford).

Yet, the reality is that today most mainstream journalists are left-leaning liberal propaganda messaging machines, rather than representatives of a respected fourth estate and free press.

The crux of the matter is, then, that professors of journalism and journalists need to understand that democratic societies require dialectic between opposing political sides in order to function as they should. And to do that they need to be able to write or talk about various political world views without displaying their progressive liberal bias.

Page separator

Update 3:30pm EDT:

An excellent example of what I mean by progressive liberal bias is displayed in this tweet. Anti-Semitic protestors at San Fransisco State University scream at the Mayor of Jerusalem — “Get the f— off our campus.” Meaning, they not only want to protest, which is their democratic right, they want to shut him down completely. Why? Because they don’t like what he represents or what he might say. Which means, they are absolutely clueless about what their demands means to democracy and free speech.