Yet another new standard that's a double standard....

I'm confident you've not heard this lately from the "non-Liberally biased" media that is sickingly Liberally biased. With the Release of Sarah Palin's new book "Going Rogue", the AP (Associated Press) has dedicated 11 reporters to "fact check". They've not done this ever, in their history. They haved asked tough questions of politicians previously, and, that's fine. They have a right to do that. They have a right to do whatever they like as a news organization. I'm confident Libs and Democrats love them, given such favorable coverage, and I'm sure they're accepted as a "legit" news source for this beneficial coverage, and, they're not Fox News. I'm sure they're very proud of the 49 Pulitzer Prize Awards for journalism. It shows incredible reporting on their part. Or, just that the standard is now set so low, any Liberal rag association can win it. You decide. However, they are looking very hard at her book, and as I said, fact checking it. Hmm. Ok. So, did they do this to any of the books President Obama has claimed to write, although most likely ghost written? Not that I'm aware of. Did they ever check any of Hillary's ghost written, oh-I mean legitiamately written (HAHAHHAHAHHAAHA) books? Did I type that out loud? I have no awareness of any fact checking done by any of Hillary's books.

AP spokesman Paul Colford, has confirmed that 11 reporters are working on the book. Really? You have 11 reporters working on it? This is a legit news story is it? Really? Wow. I guess Health Care, Terrorists getting a civil trial, a new Terrorist attack at Fort Hood under Obama's watch, really aren't that important then cause HOLY CRAP, SARAH PALIN'S WRITTEN A BOOK! And yes, it was a Terrorist attack at Fort Hood. Please Libs, stop saying it was just a crazy guy. It was not a crazy guy. It was a guy who clearly had connections to AlQaida and who carried out an attack. Crazy people who are truly insane don't have the "with-it-ness" to carry something like this out. He planned it, he was reported to have stated "Allah Ackbar" (God is great) when he began shooting. You Libs have always said that whatever happens under Bush's watch is his fault. Now, we have this attack by a Terrorist on Obama's watch. So, using YOUR standard, it's Obama's fault. And what a suprise, that's no longer the standard, and we want to play this in a politically correct way and deny it was a Terrorist attack. Sound like that fertilizer for brains Michael Moore saying "there's no Terrorist threat!". I bet about 3,000 or so who died on 9/11 may want to disagree. Oh wait, they can't. They were killed Mikie.

Getting back to Palin however, since when did this ever happen before about fact checking a politician's book? Has the AP ever done that? No, not to my knowledge. Liberal Organizations will do that with Conservative books so they can lie and distort what's in there. And to be fair, Republican Organizations will do the same thing. But a "legit" news agency shouldn't be doing that. That's not what they're supposed to be doing. Their job is news. News is healthcare, terrorism, etc. Palin is, as everyone knows, a FORMER governor, as the Libs like to point out she quit doing that. But, this yahoo from the AP confirmed reports are working on it. They, promptly refused to state what other politician's books are being checked. Why refuse to confirm that, unless of course, YOU'RE NOT CHECKING ANYONE ELSE'S BOOKS! Well, if the Libs want to start Fact Checking this stuff, great! Let's start with anything Hillary or Bill's written, then move on to anything that Obama has written. In fact, let's demand proof they really wrote it. Certainly they kept notes or a digital copy on their computer right?

They want to fact check a book, how about Vice President Biden's book "Promises to Keep"? He's an actual SITTING POLITICIAN! Hey guys at the AP, how about that?! He actually is in office, Palin's not anymore. I wanna see you check Biden's book! Has it been check? No, according to University of Washington Journalism Professor Doug Underwood. Interestingly, however, Ted Kennedy's book that came out recently was never fact checked, and it's proven none of Obama's have been as well. To be fair, nor have either Newt Gingerich or Rudy Guilliani's books. So, they're just going after Sarah. Well, if women is their only target, where then, is NOW? I would think they would find this incredibly offensive. I bet we'd see a different tone from NOW if they fact checked Hillary's book. Or, any female Lib for that matter.

Thanks AP, for showing your bias. Perhaps you will find yourself in the position so many Liberals papers are. Out of business or regarded as having as much credability as the National Enquirer. One can only hope.

For God's sake, lighten up! BS!

Recently, we've discovered that even Sesame Street is not safe from political leanings. PBS and Sesame Street recently RE-AIRED an episode referring to "POX NEWS" as a "trashy network". Now, this was before the Obama Administration waged war on the entire network. However, how interesting that it has found new life now, huh? The same lame Liberal slant here is "God, can't you guys ever take a joke, it's meant to be satirical!" Ok, I can go with that, but, only if YOU can. Case in point, the Saturday Night Live skit that had Libs HOWLING about the inaccuracies involved. Actually, they weren't inaccuracies. They were "promises" that Obama made, then promptly broke. SNL was making fun of it. So, how'd the "can't you take a joke" Libs respond? They fact checked the skit. No crap, they did. Funny, I thought the Libs were ok with satire, with "funny". Seems it's only funny, when it's done to a Conservative, or a Conservative view point or concept.

Now, some loser executive producer something or other, after the Ombudsman stepped in and agreed it was inappropriate, is now back peddling and trying to justify the skit on Sesame Street. Saying there's no way a child would pick up on it. She's right, they wouldn't. However, what it CAN accomplish is, indoctrination. Kids are great with rhyming. POX....FOX. Kids ain't stupid. Cause see, if Libs can indoctrinate kids early on, they can influence an opinion. Then, they might just have them for life. Sound radical, it is, yet, it's happening isn't it?

If we were to reverse the episode and put it in kids language and infer that CNN wasn't honest and they were trying to teach about honesty on the show, would the Libs be ok with that? I really doubt it. But then again, the show was being "satirical" towards Conservatives, weren't they.

What really disturbs me about this whole thing is a couple things. The Libs at PBS are trying to indoctrinate our kids to bring them around to the Libs point of view. I don't care what they say, I believe it to be indoctrination. It's not what they intend, it's how I perceive. Especially, with what brings me to my second point. PBS GETS TAX PAYER MONEY! So, we now have a tax payer funded point of view being pushed here. Sounds like an endorsement to me! Now, I can hear the Libs crying "Ok for God's sake, it's a kids show! Lighten up!" Really, so, you'd lighten up if a news network was referred to as LSDNBC (MSNBC) for example and the show just made fun of it? Really? BS.

Second, we just saw the Obama Administration go after A PRIVATE NEWS COMPANY! And Libs expect us to believe that that's legit, but a government funded TV network making fun of a Conservative news outlet, that's legit! Right! And what the crap, NPR receives government tax money too! And they lean left too! Why is it that when it's a PRIVATE OWNED COMPANY, it's bad to have a political agenda and viewpoint, but, when it's a publicly owned one, it's legit, and, only legit when the Libs decide it is?

If you, as a tax payer think it's ok to have the government funding (with your tax dollars) a political agenda, that pushes a viewpoint, that endorses a political philosophy and henceforth, at some point, indoctrinates our kids, then by all means write your person in Congress. Cause when the Conservatives take back over, I'm expecting Sesame Street to have Regan pics all over the place on the street. If you don't agree with this, that tax payer funded media should not present an agenda or push a viewpoint, then please, write your person in congress.

http://www.house.gov/

http://www.senate.gov/