http://tinyurl.com/5yut5v

- - -

The media is obviously partisan towards the left. Analysis proves it, it's

obvious to the observer, and surveys show that most Americans know it to be

true.

The degree to which the MSM has gone openly, nakedly pro-Obama is, however,

truly striking. They are now more obviously in the tank than ever before in

modern memory.

The most recent example is exceptionally disgusting, even for them.

The findings of the Palin "Troopergate" probe allowed the press to feel as

though they should use the opportunity to come out with headlines like . . .

<snip images>

Unlawfully? UNLAWFULLY?

Check out this analysis by Bill Dyer. Here's a key excerpt:

"I find that, although Walt Monegan's refusal to fire Trooper Michael

Wooten was not the sole reason he was fired by Governor Sarah Palin, it was

likely a contributing factor to his termination as Commissioner of Public

Safety. In spite of that, Governor Palin's firing of Commissioner Monegan

was a proper and lawful exercise of her constitutional and statutory

authority to hire and fire executive branch department heads."

Here's a note to Mr. Branchflower, who clearly is verbose, but obviously

none too keen a scholar of logic: Gov. Palin's so-called "firing" of Monegan

(it wasn't a firing, it was a re-assignment to other government duties that

he resigned rather than accept) can't simultaneously be a violation of the

Ethics Act and "a proper and lawful exercise of her constitutional and

statutory authority." This, gentle readers, is a 263-page piece of political

circus that actually explicitly refutes itself on its single most key page!

So, the report-which has flaws of its own that Dyer discusses-also clearly

says that Palin violated no laws. So how does the press report it? As

"unlawful."

That's what passes for journalism these days.

PS: Note the picture CBS chose, with Palin's hand on heart, to create what

they think is some sort of sense of "irony." At what point do we get to stop

saying that the media's behavior is disgusting and start saying that they

themselves are disgusting?

- - -

I am finding it more and more difficult to find quiet in my spirit over what

is happening. I pray; I remind myself that all things work to the good, and

I earnestly hope that I am wrong about, well, everything at this point.

The media concludes something with this bogus "Troopergate" scandal that is

plainly refuted by the very document they present as proof. Indeed the

so-called independent finding is a case study in internal contradiction, if

not speculative fiction.

The underlying charge is so ridiculous as an issue it's not funny. Anyone

familiar with the facts would have to argue the mere fact the trooper is

still employed proves that it's impossible even for a governor to fire a

dangerous schmuck who is threatening the governor's family. But whatever.

Yet, for all the mass of evidence of Obama's radical political agenda and

reckless, if not dangerous, political alliances to extremists of the first

water, not to mention the cult-like following the media and Hollywood are

creating around this guy, established facts about these relationships are

presented as partisan innuendo, when they are presented at all--which is

almost never, and usually in a tone of criticism of McCain and his

supporters for bringing them up.

I would love to see an "independent panel" of Obama's past actions and

political alliances. Let's speculate about the "likely contributing factors"

of his past influences that point to nefarious motives--most of which come

right out of his own "memoirs" (possibly ghost written at least in part by

Ayers--see http://tinyurl.com/4pxtdu). It's obvious why they did this--to

blunt legitimate criticism of Obama's connections to domestic terrorists

(Ayers & Dohrn), Marxists (Saul Alinsky, his friends at the Democratic

Socialists conference in Chicago in 1996), Muslim extremists (al-Monsour),

communist dictatorial thugs (Raila Odinga), greedy executives (Raines,

Johnston), bank lobbyists (Joe Biden's son, no less) etc.

The issues isn't that he has no record, it's that what record there is

cannot be openly discussed. And what can be discussed cannot be honestly

discussed. His accusations, for example, that McCain's "deregulation" and

opposition to "common-sense" regulation is so easily refuted my head

explodes each time he says it and the media refuses to do their job of

fact-checking. Kent's video yesterday put the lie to that--but none of those

clips are making it to the nightly news. Why?

Obama was right---McCain has no idea what he's up against. And the voters

have no idea what they are, apparently, about to put in power.

God help us all.

- Bob