Showing posts with label MSM. Show all posts
Showing posts with label MSM. Show all posts

Thursday, March 06, 2014

PIC: How to get state-run media to cover the Benghazi scandal

Via our summer intern @BiffSpackle:



Hat tip: BadBlue Real-Time News

PIC: How to get legacy media to focus on the IRS scandal

Via our summer intern @BiffSpackle:


Hat tip: BadBlue News


Sunday, March 02, 2014

Can You Say "Allāhu Akbar" in Chinese?

Guest post by Dan from New York


In China, at least 29 people were stabbed to death by a group of machete-wielding “terrorists.” The hideous attack happened on Saturday, but you’re excused if you haven’t got wind of it yet.

Our state-run media has chosen to downplay the story, and instead, has gone into narrative-protection mode. For one thing, connecting Islam to the violence going on around the world could start the average guy thinking the Islamic jihad is the common denominator and that the Arab-Israeli conflict needs a new name: Muslim-Jewish conflict sounds more accurate to me.

Why TIME has chosen to spill the beans and mention that Muslims were behind the attack in China is anyone’s guess. Of course, after one call from the White House TIME could issue a retraction.

Deadly Terror Attack in Southwestern China Blamed on Separatist Muslim Uighurs


By Hannah Beech

A mass terror spree in a southwestern Chinese city that killed at least 29 people was carried out by assailants from the northwestern region of Xinjiang, which is home to the Uighur ethnic minority, according to China’s official news service, Xinhua. Knife-wielding attackers, dressed in black clothes, stormed the railway station of provincial capital Kunming shortly after 9 pm on March 1, slaughtering those who could not flee fast enough. More than 130 were also wounded, said Xinhua. Photos circulating on social media showed images of smears of blood and scattered luggage from terrified railway passengers. Xinhua described the assault as an “organized, premeditated, violent terrorist attack.” The state news service said that five of the at least 10 attackers had been shot dead by security forces.

The horrific event is now being dubbed China’s 3-01, as in March 1, in an echo of what other terror attacks in the U.S. and Britain were called. Chinese have flocked to social media platforms to express shock at the carnage, in which children and elderly were targeted by the assailants. In an article headlined “Nothing justified civilian slaughter in China’s ’9-11,’” the Global Times, a Beijing daily, wrote: “A nationwide outrage has been stirred. Justice needs to be done and terrorists should be punished with iron fists.”

If Uighurs did carry out the attack, the Kunming bloodshed marks a chilling escalation in a struggle for autonomy and even separation from the Chinese state. Members of a Turkic ethnic minority who look very different from China’s Han majority, Uighurs are concentrated in the arid region of Xinjiang, which borders Central Asia.... Over the past year, violent clashes between Uighurs and Chinese security forces have proliferated, with at least 100 people killed...

Editor's note: I blame Bush. And Israel.


Saturday, March 01, 2014

PARTY OF WEAKNESS: @OFA's Greatest Gaffes

Four years into Carter's presidency, Russia invaded Afghanistan. Five years into Obama's, Russia invades Ukraine.

Coincidence? Or just the inevitable result of Democrat fecklessness and weakness?


Flashback:


What a bunch of crackpots.

You know, if we had a real media, the clowns at OFA and other Marxist front groups would be shamed into offering an apology to Mitt Romney and Sarah Palin. But, as it stands today, OFA and the media are one and the same.


Friday, February 28, 2014

BILL OF INDICTMENT: The Democrats' Unlawful Manipulation of the IRS to Attack Conservatives

IRS-gate: On Wednesday, former chairman of the Federal Election Commission Bradley A. Smith laid out a scathing indictment of President Obama and his henchmen in Congress. In short, the IRS targeting scandal traces directly back to the White House and Barack Obama in particular.

Now consider the following events, all of which were either widely reported, publicly released by officeholders or revealed later in testimony to Congress. These are the dots the media refuse to connect:

• Jan. 27, 2010: President Obama criticizes Citizens United in his State of the Union address and asks Congress to "correct" the decision.

• Feb. 11, 2010: Sen. Chuck Schumer (D., N.Y.) says he will introduce legislation known as the Disclose Act to place new restrictions on some political activity by corporations and force more public disclosure of contributions to 501(c)(4) organizations. Mr. Schumer says the bill is intended to "embarrass companies" out of exercising the rights recognized in Citizens United. "The deterrent effect should not be underestimated," he said.

• Soon after, in March 2010, Mr. Obama publicly criticizes conservative 501(c)(4) organizations engaging in politics. In his Aug. 21 radio address, he warns Americans about "shadowy groups with harmless sounding names" and a "corporate takeover of our democracy."

• Sept. 28, 2010: Mr. Obama publicly accuses conservative 501(c)(4) organizations of "posing as not-for-profit, social welfare and trade groups." Max Baucus, then chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, asks the IRS to investigate 501(c)(4)s, specifically citing Americans for Job Security, an advocacy group that says its role is to "put forth a pro-growth, pro-jobs message to the American people."

An Insider's Stunning Firsthand Experience with President Obama

Editor's note: While this email was delivered 'over the transom', I have verified several aspects of the story including the the participants in the lecture series. I have redacted the full name of the original author.

Alan Simpson of Simpson-Bowles fame lays out his experience in dealing with the President


As you have heard me say before that volunteering at the Bush Center library is a "great gig". I could write about my great experiences daily; but today was one of the highlights, so far…


Southern Methodist University has a lecture series called the Tate Lecture Series which has a significant speaker every month from September to May. Last month was Charles Krauthammer and last night was Erskine Bowles and Alan Simpson. Tickets to those events are like "hens teeth" and they are passed down from father to son or family to family and has a waiting list of seven years for season tickets for the general public. One of the benefits of these visits is that these folks normally visit the library (after normal hours) while in town.

Today's experience was worth a lot. Alan Simpson was the co-author of the Simpson - Bowles Commission appointed by the current president to come up with a plan and path forward to help the nation get back on a sound fiscal footing. It was to include spending limits and controls that would address existing entitlements, a change in tax codes and the abolishment of selected existing tax breaks for special interest groups. Accordingly, It called for a sound fiscal plan that would get us into reasonable balance in 10 years.

As everyone knows, Alan Simpson (R) (82) is a retired senator from Wyoming and is known for his "frank" opinions and statements and in some ways seen as eccentric in some of his views. Erskine Bowles (D) (69), who was Chief of Staff in former administrations, is a respected Democrat and was an equal partner in putting this study and report together with supposedly high respect and influence in the Democratic Party.

The intent was for the current President to use their report as a road map to fiscal responsibility. This report was issued in 2010 and as quickly dismissed by the president as a non-starter prior to the election of 2012 based on its perceived political impact on his re-election.

When I saw Simpson today in the museum, I approached him to welcome him to the museum as a team leader since that is my job for the general public. Normally, VIP's or "celebs" have Foundation escorts during these visits, but in typical Simpson fashion, he wanted to be just another visitor.

Wednesday, February 26, 2014

Why are will still debating whether CNN's Carol Costello is stupid?

An open letter to CNN's Carol Costello by David Hoffer

Carol, in your recent CNN opinion piece, the headline was Why are we still debating climate change?”. The very first statement in the article that followed was “There is no debate”.

The answer to your question is actually right in your own article. I’ll get to that in a bit, please bear with me. I wanted to touch on your claim that there is no debate first. I’d like you to consider the following statement, which I provide with no intent of malice whatsoever, only as a means of making a point.

Carol Costello is stupid. There is no debate.

Now what would you think if you saw this in print, followed by a long explanation as to what is wrong with people who don’t agree, and a refusal to examine any facts related to the accusation? I imagine you’d be miffed. I imagine also that any examination of the facts would prove me wrong, I seriously doubt that such a statement would stand up to any fair debate of the matter. Which brings me to a question Carol:

If the facts supporting Climate Change are so obvious, should not debating the facts of the matter strengthen those facts? Just as you would be eager to prove that you are not, in fact, stupid, should you not be equally as eager to prove your opinion by engaging in factual debate?

While you ponder that, and keeping in mind that I did say the answer to your question is in your article and I would get to that, let’s examine the only fact upon which your argument rests, which is that there is a consensus among 97% of scientists. Well Carol, I read that study. Did you? I’m guessing not.

Saturday, February 22, 2014

DESPICABLE: Rep. Gary Peters (D-MI) Savages Leukemia Patient for Describing Her Obamacare Experiences

Does it get any lower than this?

Yesterday, Rep Gary Peters (D-MI) began attacking cancer patient Julie Boonstra for daring to speak out against ObamaCare.

Her crime?

She appeared in an Americans For Prosperity television ad and described her devastating and disheartening experiences with Obamacare.

Instead of answering the concerns, Peters had his lawyers try to get the ad pulled from Michigan stations. Here's the copy of the letter Peters' attorneys sent to try and silence dissent (PDF).

Her story of a canceled policy is true not just for her, but millions of Americans.

This afternoon, AFP-Michigan will accompany Julie Boonstra in her visit to Gary Peters home; she wants an apology.


Update: Michigan Democrat Rep. Gary Peters threatens TV station licenses over Obamacare ad

Friday, February 21, 2014

How long will Roll Call Magazine continue to embarrass itself?

That's a rhetorical question. Please consider the ludicrous hack named Taegan Goddard and his ill-named "Political Wire", which would be more aptly named "White House Press Release Wire".


His recent articles are reminiscent of a modern-day Leni Riefenstahl, offering a one-sided view into the clusterbungle known as "Obamacare", which the majority of Americans recognize as the most ill-conceived, unconstitutional, amoral, Marxist, and criminal excuse for a "law" in American history.

Goddard's recent coverage include such gems as:

• "Don’t Believe Those Obamacare Attack Ads"

• "The Stock Market Loves Obamacare"

• "California Enrollment Surges Past Projected Goal"

• "Obamacare Now Needs to Take Root"

• "Healthcare.Gov is Improving: Time to Scrutinize State Exchanges"

• "Assessing Impact of Obamacare on Workforce is an ‘Imprecise Art’"

• "Obamacare Enrollment Still Advances Despite State Opposition"

• "As Insurers Seek Profits, Poor Face Higher Premiums on Obamacare Exchanges"

• "An Abundance of Good News for Obamacare"

• "Obamacare Killing Jobs? It’s a Myth"

Littered through Goddard's coverage of other topics are predictable hits such as "Holder Calls for End to Felon Disenfranchisement Laws", "Obama’s Abuse of Executive Powers Debunked" (someone inform liberal Constitutional attorney Jonathan Turley), "Extreme Weather Reignites Coal Debate", "One Percent Wins But Charity Loses", "Protests Continue Over ‘Greatest Mass Deportation in U.S. History’", "CBO Minimum Wage Report is ‘Remarkably Biased’", "Will an Increase in the Minimum Wage Really Hurt Jobs?", etc., etc., etc.

I can't figure out whether Goddard is an economic illiterate, a malevolent propagandist, or just another Soviet sleeper spy helping to destroy the Constitution.

I'm open to suggestions.

In the mean time, ignore Roll Call and read the uncensored news at BadBlue.com.

MARK LEVIN: Obama has hijacked the institutions of government and unleashed them on the people

20 February 2014, Mark Levin:


The FCC, call it whatever you want, Barack Obama's henchman, Barack Obama's comrades, there, that's right, all over the federal government have hijacked the institutions of government and are now turning them on the people. Whether it's the EPA, or the Department of Justice, the Interior Department, NOAA, this, that or the other, they're using the government, they are using a law against us. Which is the definition of tyranny.

They have abused the First Amendment with wiretaps, and other forms of government action against the media in this country and the media in this country apparently is sadistic. As long as their guy is doing it, well then, do it. So the media in this country no longer stands for free anything. Free speech, free press, any of it. It is the Praetorian guard media -- as I've been saying for years -- protecting this president, protecting his ideology because the people in the media, for the most part, are of the same ilk.

No respect for the rule of law. No respect for the constitution. Now they'll use those things to attack Republican presidents, but they don't give a damn about it when it comes to a radical leftist like Obama. And so it is necessary to remind ourselves who we are, what our power is, what our heritage is as we fight what is increasingly the battle that the Framers fought against tyranny.


Related: President Barack Obama's Complete List of Historic Firsts [Updated]

Thursday, February 20, 2014

Your awesome, progressive-crushing juxtaposition o' the day: Ana Marie Cox beclownment edition

The inane and dimwitted Ana Marie Cox is at it again.

Yesterday's Guardian found her whining yet again about America's investors, entrepreneurs and job producers who have been tarred as the evil "one percent."

Specifically, Cox claims that our class system prevents those of modest means from progressing to the ranks of the super-rich.

Because the wealth of the super-rich is just so damn far away, without any rungs in the ladder between, no assistance for that leap of faith that allows those who struggle to hope their struggles can cease.

But, I digress. Consider today's headline from Bloomberg:


As I have pointed out countless times, the Forbes 400 (America's wealthiest individuals) list is populated with dozens upon dozens of self-made billionaires.

It's income mobility that makes America great, you progressive dimwit, not income equality.

It's too bad Cox is genetically impervious to facts, history, logic, and reason.


Hat tip: Jim Geraghty

Mark Steyn explains why the House Republican leadership is a sad travesty of a pathetic joke

This, my friends, is called speaking truth to power.
In Australia, each citizen's share of the [national] debt is $12,000; in New Zealand, it's $15,000 per person; in Canada, $18,000; in the United Kingdom, $28,000. And in the United States it's $54,000 per person — twice as much as Britain, thrice as much as Canada, closing in on five times as much as Australia. And that's before you toss in all the other junk which leaves a total debt burden in the US of close to three-quarters of a million dollars per family. America is on course to be the first nation of negative millionaires.

So, while Canada's got a balanced budget and New Zealand's paying down its national debt and Australia's government debt is about 11 per cent of GDP (versus 100 per cent of GDP in the United States), Americans are supposed to be encouraged because, in a spirit of comity, the bipartisan kleptocracy in Washington has nodded through a plan to make things worse. Former Congressman turned Club for Growth honcho Chris Chocola:

Which brings us to the Ryan–Murray budget, a partial repeal of the sequester. The agreement was a function of the fact that many Republicans in the House simply never wanted to cut spending or limit the size of government.

I served with and respect Paul Ryan. I know the Ryan–Murray budget is not his ideal budget. But that doesn't make the deal any less of a joke. An analysis by the Senate Budget Committee Republicans noted that 56 percent of the offsets for the reversal of the sequester come in FY 2022 and FY 2023 — a decade from now.

Speaker Boehner called that "deficit reduction." I call that a fraud and everyone with any common sense would agree with me. What kind of message does it send to voters when Republican leadership is claiming that you can offset increases in spending today with cuts in spending a decade from now?

It sends the message that the GOP is a joke. Canada, Australia and New Zealand are doing it now, not legislating fairyland cuts that kick in eight years after the legislators' terms of office end. Granted, all those countries have conservative governments, which the US is in no danger of getting any time soon. But here's why the Republican Party really isn't good enough: it's not just that the GOP is less fiscally conservative - by which I mean fiscally responsible - than other conservative parties, it's less fiscally conservative than many left-wing governments. The Liberal Party of Canada spent the "fat" years of the Nineties paying off the national debt, prompting my old comrade Kate O'Beirne to joke, "If only we could get American conservatives to be as fiscally responsible as Canadian liberals" - a jest one could also extend to the Australian Labor Party, which, while certainly profligate in Aussie terms, was a paragon of rectitude compared to Boehner and the gang.

Kate's is a cute joke. Except, of course, that the joke's on us. As Chris Chocola concludes:

So the Republican leadership says the Club for Growth has been "misleading their followers" and has "lost credibility"? That's a bit ironic, coming from a big-spending, debt-increasing, farm-subsidy enabling, entitlement-expanding party leadership that has abandoned its principles . . . all in the name of retaining their own power. And to what end?

When a Congressman talks about reducing spending in 2024, 2027, 2030, laugh in his face, and tell him that, when Representatives are elected for 20-year terms, then we'll listen to his plans for 2034. The bipartisan consensus to ramp up those debt per capita figures is not just an abstraction, but a massive gamble on the future - the future of the dollar as the global currency, the future of your children, and the future of America as a First World nation.

You can read more regarding that last point in Mark's international bestseller After America, personally autographed copies of which are available in hardback, paperback and audio editions exclusively at the SteynOnline bookstore, and whose proceeds will go to fund Steyn's end of the upcoming Mann vs. Steyn trial.


Hat tip: Nice Deb

Wednesday, February 19, 2014

NOT CREEPY AT ALL: Obama FCC Placing Government Monitors in Newsrooms to Police Media

Guest post by Matthew Clark

The Obama Administration’s Federal Communication Commission (FCC) is poised to place government monitors in newsrooms across the country in an absurdly draconian attempt to intimidate and control the media.

Before you dismiss this assertion as utterly preposterous (we all know how that turned out when the Tea Party complained that it was being targeted by the IRS), this bombshell of an accusation comes from an actual FCC Commissioner.

FCC Commissioner Ajit Pai reveals a brand new Obama Administration program that he fears could be used in “pressuring media organizations into covering certain stories.”

As Commissioner Pai explains in the Wall Street Journal:

Last May the FCC proposed an initiative to thrust the federal government into newsrooms across the country. With its “Multi-Market Study of Critical Information Needs,” or CIN, the agency plans to send researchers to grill reporters, editors and station owners about how they decide which stories to run. A field test in Columbia, S.C., is scheduled to begin this spring.

The purpose of the CIN, according to the FCC, is to ferret out information from television and radio broadcasters about “the process by which stories are selected” and how often stations cover “critical information needs,” along with “perceived station bias” and “perceived responsiveness to underserved populations.”

In fact, the FCC is now expanding the bounds of regulatory powers to include newspapers, which it has absolutely no authority over, in its new government monitoring program.

The FCC has apparently already selected eight categories of “critical information” “that it believes local newscasters should cover.”

That’s right, the Obama Administration has developed a formula of what it believes the free press should cover, and it is going to send government monitors into newsrooms across America to stand over the shoulders of the press as they make editorial decisions.

This poses a monumental danger to constitutionally protected free speech and freedom of the press.

Saturday, February 15, 2014

"Follow @directorblue on Twitter or the puppy gets it"

I'm so close to 5,000 followers I can taste it. Metaphorically, of course. Because that would be very unsanitary in real life.


Anyone else willing to pick up the gauntlet on the road to 5,000 followers?

Sunday, February 09, 2014

Just when you think the Washington Post has hit rock bottom, they sink deeper into the tar-pit

To paraphrase Jim Geraghty, in a nation of 320 million people, I'm sure you can find someone who's happy with Obamacare.

And guess what? The execrable Washington Post and someone named "Sandhya Somashekhar" -- which I'm pretty sure is pronounced "Gesundheit!" -- found someone delighted that they can quit their job. You know, to "escape job lock", which is the new term for Obamacare-induced unemployment.

Count Polly Lower among those who quit their jobs because of the health-care law... It happened in September, when her boss abruptly changed her job description. She went from doing payroll, which she liked, to working on her boss’s schedule, which she loathed...

Hold up: Polly had to work on her boss's schedule? Oh, the humanity!

At another time, she might have had to grit her teeth and accept the new position because she needed the health benefits... But with the health-care law soon to take effect, she simply resigned — and hasn’t looked back.

“It was wonderful. It was very freeing,” said Lower, 56, of Bourbon, Ind...

Yes, isn't being jobless an aspirational goal for everyone? You know, so they can pursue their goals, like writing cowboy poetry or weaving risque macrame.

...[Lower] is now babysitting her 5-year-old granddaughter full time. With the help of federal subsidies that kicked in Jan. 1, she is paying less than $500 a month for health coverage for herself and her husband.

So let's state this more clearly: thanks to Obamacare, Lower has now joined the roughly 100 million Americans collecting an average of $9,000 each from more than 80 means-tested welfare programs.

The Washington Post found ... Lower through Families USA, a health advocacy group that supports the health-care law and maintains a database of people who have benefited from it.

And just who is Families USA? They're an SEIU front group that has been pushing for socialized medicine for years.

In short, the Washington Post is doing its level best to protect Democrats as we head into the 2014 midterm elections even as millions lose their jobs and their health care; and as many as 100 million more may be similarly impacted in 2015, unless the Imperial President rewrites the Obamacare law again through executive edict.

And where does "Sandhya Somashekhar" and the Washington Post find their loathsome propaganda? Why a hardcore, militant labor union aligned with the Marxist-Leninist movement, of course!

Our goal as socialists is to abolish private ownership of the means of production. Our immediate task is to limit the capitalist class’s prerogatives in the workplace…In the short run we must at least minimize the degree of exploitation of workers by capitalists. We can accomplish this by promoting full employment policies, passing local living wage laws, but most of all by increasing the union movement’s power…

I'll let Jonah Goldberg dispense with Gesundheit and her Marxist propaganda in his usual, incisive fashion.

...the real CBO story should be: “That awkward moment when everyone realizes Obamacare was a huge mistake.” The same CBO report projects that by 2024 the number of non-elderly uninsured will be — drum roll, please — 31 million Americans.

And that’s why all of this talk of Democrats as the Job-Lock Liberators is pathetic and hilarious at the same time. Virtually every promise has been broken, every prediction falsified. And now, at a time when millions want work that doesn’t exist, Democrats are claiming victory by trimming the amount of work actually being done.

Hopefully voters will look for ways to liberate these Democrats from the curse of job-lock come November.

The title of the WaPo secretion is "They quit their jobs, thanks to health-care law."

I don't think that headline means what they think it means.


Hat tip: BadBlue News

Monday, February 03, 2014

WHITE HOUSE TRIVIA: All of those dead bodies piling up from Benghazi and Fast & Furious? Those are on Fox

When confronted with rank propaganda like this, I really, really want to drop the f-bomb and other appropriate adjectives. But this is a family blog.

Not accustomed to being asked difficult questions about his failures in office, President Obama attacked Fox News host Bill O'Reilly during a pre-Super Bowl interview on Sunday for daring to demand answers about the Benghazi terrorist attack and the IRS targeting conservative groups.

O'Reilly said, "Your detractors believe that you did not tell the world it was a terror attack because your campaign didn't want that out. That's what they believe." Obama ranted in reply: "And they believe it because folks like you are telling them that." O'Reilly responded: "No, I'm not telling them that, I'm asking you whether you were told it was a terror attack."

Minutes later, while O'Reilly was asking about the IRS scandal, Obama tried to dismiss the topic: "Folks have, again, had multiple hearings on this. I mean, these kinds of things keep on surfacing in part because you and your TV station will promote them.

As the Conservative Tribune puts it:

Obama did in this interview what Obama has always done: Shift the blame to someone else. If something goes wrong in his presidency, it’s the fault of Republicans, racism, Fox News, or anything else that seems like a good scapegoat.

On Obama's desk, there must be a new riff on Truman's sign that reads:

THE BUCK STOPS ANYWHERE BUT HERE


Or:

THE BUCK STOPS WITH FOX NEWS

I don't have the appropriate words in my vocabulary to describe what I think of this kind of behavior.


Hat tip: BadBlue Real-Time News

Wednesday, January 29, 2014

LEVIN: He wants to talk about inequality; we want to talk about liberty

Via Mark Levin

Let me be clear about this. Let me help some of these Republicans here and of course tomorrow's hosts, they may want to cherry-pick some of this. This president has created more poverty, more economic inequality, more economic dislocation, more crushing debt than any president in modern American history including Jimmy Carter and Herbert Hoover.

This president has set back the economic progress of women more than any modern president. This president has set back the economic progress of minorities, including African-Americans, more than any modern president. This president has set back economic opportunity for our young people -- our children and our grandchildren -- more than any modern president because he has embraced the most ideological, the most radical form of economics. A system they cannot work; a system that will not work; a system that is impossible.

He's spreading misery, he's spreading destitution and he's spreading poverty. This is not the America that the Framers established. This is not the America that we were born into, each and every one of us. And because he's increasingly frustrated by his own incompetence and failure. What is he doing?

He's dividing this nation, he's Balkanizing this nation along every conceivable route that he can find -- whether it's religious, whether it's economic, whether it's race, whether it's age, whether it's income, whether it's religion. And he's seizing more and more power as he panics, as he becomes desperate, as imperial minds do. Yes, he's an imperial president. And just as I said, this president has been conducting a certain, a sure gradual coup which is now being picked up.

He's also an imperial president, which is also now being understood. He's changing our system of government; he's destroying our economic system. He's nationalizing businesses and industries through the front door and through the back door. Did you know they have over 6,000 regulations and rules that they're preparing to unleash on us?

Do you know that he's put out the word to his cabinet, to his agency heads and to everybody in the federal government that this is their time? Now come hell or high water by 2016 when he leaves office he wants thousands and thousands of regulations pouring out at the EPA, the [Agriculture] Department, the Education department, the Energy department, Interior and all the rest.

This man is a one-man wrecking ball, that's exactly what he is. He wants to talk about inequality; we want to talk about liberty. And it is liberty that we need to talk about.


Via Mark Levin

I GUESS WHINY, DEPRESSING LIARS AREN'T GOOD FOR RATINGS: State of the Union Nielsens Lowest Ever


An anonymous tipster writes, "...according to Niesen, Obama's 2014 SOTU registered only a 20.7 household share rating... and according to the chart in the story below which goes back to 1993, no President has had a lower rating. I don't know how far back you'd have to go to find a lower rating, but it is at least the lowest in over 20 years. He's now historically boring and tough to watch."

On Tuesday, Jan. 28, 2014 President Barack Obama delivered his second State of the Union address of his second term in office. The address was carried live from 9:00 p.m. to 10:15 p.m. on 13 networks and tape-delayed on Univision. The sum of the average audience for those networks was 33,299,172 viewers with a combined household rating of 20.7. The networks carrying the address live were CBS, ABC, NBC, FOX, Azteca, Fox Business, Fox News Channel, CNN, MSNBC, CNBC, Al Jazeera America, Galavision and Mun2.
Networks Combined Household Ratings No. of Households No. of Viewers (P2+)
CBS, ABC, NBC, FOX, Azteca, Fox Business, Fox News Channel, CNN, MSNBC, CNBC, Al Jazeera America, Galavision, Mun2, UNI* 20.7 23,949,843 33,299,172
Source: Nielsen

*Tape delay.

Below is a historical look at past State of the Union addresses.

Historical State of the Union Addresses

Date Networks Combined Household Rating Combined No. of Households Combined No. of Viewers President
2/12/2013 FOX, ABC, CBS, NBC, PBS, Azteca, UNI, MFX, CNBC, CNN, Fox Business, Fox News Channel, MSNBC, Current, Centric, GALA 21.8 24,767,047 33,497,607 Obama
1/24/2012 ABC, CBS, FOX, NBC, TEL, TF, UNI, CNBC, CNN, FBN, FOXNC, GALA, MSNBC and MUN2 24 27,569,423 37,752,613 Obama
1/25/2011 ABC, CBS, FOX, NBC, TEL, UNI, CNN, Centric, CNBC, FOXNC, and MSNBC 26.6 30,871,688 42,789,947 Obama
1/27/2010 ABC, CBS, FOX, NBC, TEL, UNI, CNN, BET, CNBC, FOXNC, MSNBC 29.8 34,182,725 48,009,595 Obama
2/24/2009* ABC, CBS, FOX, NBC, CNBC, CNN, FOXNC, MSNBC, TELEMUNDO, UNIVISION 32.5 37,185,000 52,373,000 Obama
1/28/2008 ABC, CBS, FOX, NBC, CNN, FOXNC, MSNBC, TELEMUNDO^, UNIVISION 24.7 27,702,000 37,515,000 G.W Bush
1/23/2007 ABC, CBS, FOX**, NBC, CNN, FOXNC, MSNBC, TELEMUNDO**, UNIVISION ** 29.6 32,968,000 45,486,000 G.W. Bush
1/31/2006 ABC, CBS, FOX, NBC, CNN, FOXNC, MSNBC 26.9 29,578,000 41,699,000 G.W. Bush
  TELEMUNDO, AZTECA AMERICA, TELFUTURA, TELEMUNDO 8.4 950,000 1,480,000  
2/2/2005 ABC, CBS, FOX, NBC, CNN, FOXNC, MSNBC 25.2 27,699,000 38,382,000 G. W. Bush
  TELEMUNDO, TELEFUTURA 6 660,000 1,050,000  
1/20/2004 ABC, CBS, FOX, NBC, CNN, CNBC, FOXNC, MSNBC 28 30,286,000 43,411,000 G. W. Bush
1/28/2003 ABC, CBS, FOX, NBC, CNN, CNBC, FOXNC, MSNBC 38.8 41,447,000 62,061,000 G. W. Bush
1/29/2002 ABC, CBS, FOX, NBC, CNN, CNBC, FOXNC, MSNBC 33.6 35,547,000 51,773,000 G.W. Bush
2/27/2001* ABC, CBS, FOX, NBC, CNN, FOXNC, MSNBC 27.6 28,201,000 39,793,000 G.W. Bush
1/27/2000 ABC, CBS, FOX, NBC, CNN, FOXNC, MSNBC 22.4 22,536,000 31,478,000 Clinton
1/19/1999 ABC, CBS, FOX, NBC, CNN, FOXNC, MSNBC 31 30,700,000 43,500,000 Clinton
1/27/1998 ABC, CBS, FOX, NBC, CNN, CNBC, FOXNC, MSNBC 37.2 36,513,000 53,077,000 Clinton
2/4/1997 ABC, CBS, FOX, NBC, CNN 28.4 27,600,000 41,100,000 Clinton
1/23/1996 ABC, CBS, FOX, NBC, CNN 29.6 28,400,000 40,900,000 Clinton
1/24/1995 ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN 29.5 28,100,000 42,200,000 Clinton
1/25/1994 ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN 32.9 31,000,000 45,800,000 Clinton
2/17/1993* ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN 44.3 41,200,000 66,900,000 Clinton
Source: Nielsen

I wonder if Chris Matthews got a thrill up his leg when he saw the ratings?

The science is settled: Americans are tuning this colossal failure of a would-be president out.