The Phaserl


Media Coverage of Identity Politics

from BATR:

By any traditional standards of accomplishment, Barack Obama has failed miserably. This assessment is not based upon any particular ideology or partisan politics, just on straight pragmatic results. Furthermore, if you watch or read any of the accounts from the establishment media you would think that the black messiah would shuffle into a second term on the strength of his vocal talent. Singing sweet melodies appeals to those lacking in intellectual skills to assess and judge reality from rhetoric. What is striking about the tenor of the political debate is that the face of the country now wears a socialist mask that the masses love and demands even greater expansion.

The message out of the mass media never misses an opportunity to apologize for the multiculturalism missteps that push the destructive nature of identity politics. Using the rouge of labeling the white middle class as habitual racists, and playing upon a fabricated and discredited guilt complex, the Obama administration has demonstrated that the true bigots work for the POTUS in the district of criminals.

Another tortured viewing of the Obama phone madam is not necessary. The ridiculous rant for more government freebies to supplement their dependency lifestyle is not unique to any one community or administration. Mark Hendrickson, in the Forbes article, What the “Obama Phone” Tells Us About America’s Health, gives a proper assessment.

“The race of the woman is irrelevant. The video reminds me of an incident that happened early in Bill Clinton’s presidency. The Clintons had profited handsomely from an allegedly shady real estate deal that became known as “the Whitewater scandal.” At a public presidential appearance, a woman (white, as I recall) called out from a crowd, “Don’t you worry about Whitewater, Bill, just keep our welfare checks coming!”

One expects that a credible publication like Forbes will provide an insightful and balanced conclusion. However, when analyzing public feedback after the first Presidential debate, the progressive spin to downplay Romney rave reviews, rises it’s bias head. An example is found in NewsHounds, who proclaims the motto – We watch Fox so you don’t have to!

In their article, Luntz’ Presidential Debate Focus Group Has A Suspicious Makeup is in full damage control mode puts a smiley face on a poor Obama debate performance.

“Frank Luntz has a history of putting together focus groups that are skewed toward Republicans which he tries to pass off as fair and/or representative. So I was immediately suspicious when Luntz described tonight’s presidential debate focus group by saying, “13 of these 24 people voted for Obama in 2008, only 10 voted for McCain.” Notice that he didn’t say how many were Democrats, how many Republicans, how many independents or other. For all we know, those 13 people who voted for Obama were Republicans. And guess what? Every one of them said they were undecided about who to vote for before the debate. That’s not a representative sample of voters at all.

To be fair, I’ll agree that Romney won the debate. But would that many Democrats actually have suddenly made up their minds to vote for Romney after this one debate? And a lot of the participants’ comments about Obama sounded suspiciously like Republican talking points.”

Actually, this sample focus group consisted of independent registered voters. Facts have little meaning in the minds of the Obama media enablers. You would expect that the “true believers” should be sufficiently humiliated; to invoke their distorted viewpoint, but how do they explain away the favorable Romney new impressions and perceptions by the American public? How dare the Romney camp challenge the prevailing wisdom of the progressive pressitute media, with a winning presentation?

Read More @

Help us spread the ANTIDOTE to corporate propaganda.

Please follow SGT Report on Twitter & help share the message.

Leave a Reply

You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>