Believe it or not, the media is celebrating births, as they recently noted that 5 million “assisted reproductive” births since have occurred 1978.
But while they’re cheering the productivity of the chemically enhanced and scientifically tweaked stork, it would be nice to mention how busy the vulture has been during the same period – over 36 million U.S. children were aborted during those years.
"They have one month," announced Time magazine's Kate Pickert. "If the officials running the new Affordable Care Act insurance exchanges cannot fix crippling computer glitches by then, the health law’s future could be imperiled, according to a former high-ranking health care official."
“By November—certainly the middle of November—the sites have to be able to handle major traffic for people to be able to set up accounts and purchase coverage," Pickert quoted Joel Ario, former director of the Office of Health Insurance Exchanges at the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services. "[T]he longer it takes to repair problems with exchange web sites, the harder it may be to enroll Americans who want coverage," Pickert noted. [Helpful suggestion for Pickert: For the office Halloween party you really should dress up as Captain Obvious.]
Are you happy now, Republicans? You went and forced the president to cancel his trip to Asia and with it an important foreign policy overture.
That's the message Time magazine is sending readers with Michael Crowley's October 4 post, "Shutdown Dents Vital Obama Foreign Policy Goal," which was plugged on the Time.com front page with a photo of a frowning President Obama given the teaser headline, "Grounded by the Shutdown." "President Obama cancels a long-planned Asia excursion as the standoff continues at home, yet again putting off U.S. goals to recharge relations with the continent," complained the front-page caption [see screen capture below the page break]. Here's a taste of Crowley's story (emphasis mine):
"Wendy Davis, Misogyny Magnet," blared a teaser headline on the Time.com front page this afternoon. The headline was accompanied by a photo of the Democratic Texas state senator who is most famous for her lengthy but ultimately unsuccessful filibuster of a bill to regulate the Lone Star State's abortion clinics.
The article in question -- written by Center for American Progress Senior Fellow and former New York Times Opinionator columnist Judith Warner -- was posted in the magazine's Ideas blog, an opinion feature which does not necessarily reflect the opinion of Time's editorial board. That said, the premise of Warner's piece was essentially that the pro-choice lobby's favorite new bogeyman, Republicans engaged in a war on women* will propel Davis into the governor's chair next fall (emphases mine):
Only at the very end of their article did Rogers and Miller mention that the Democratic National Committee is having a fundraising field day off the work stoppage. There was, however, no mention that the DNC desperately needs the cash because they're drowning in red ink. Reported Fortune magazine's Tory Newmyer yesterday morning:
"Is she Cinderella or Joan of Arc?" Time.com contributor Hilary Hylton mused of Texas State Senator Wendy Davis (D) in the lead sentence of her Friday, September 27 story, "Wendy Davis Laces Up Her Running (for Governor) Shoes." ] "Now that she’s on the verge of announcing a run for Texas governor, everyone is wondering whether the glass slipper will fit, or will she be a martyr for her cause?" Hylton reasoned.[h/t Joshua Trevino of the Texas Public Policy Foundation]
If by "everyone," Hylton means the subset of humanity that constitutes America's liberal political journalists, than yes, she may have a point. Most Americans and I would imagine most Texans, however, don't even know who Wendy Davis is. Hylton seems to get that and adds that, "In reality, the story unfolding in Texas will likely neither be fanciful nor tragic, but a very long, very expensive and very nasty political tale." Translation: win or lose (likely the latter), Wendy Davis will get banged up something fierce in her race for governor.
In its 40-year history, the liberal media never really cared for the Heritage Foundation. But now that the think tank has been more assertive in its engagement of Capitol Hill, the liberal media are rewriting history to depict the move as something that is threatening the organization's respectability inside the Beltway. In July, I noted the Wall Street Journal's stab at the concern-trolling about Heritage's diminishing gravitas. In January, my colleague Matthew Balan noted the Washington Post's bias about Heritage's lobbying arm, Heritage Action.
Today it's Time magazine's turn, as writer Zeke Miller looked at how "political action arm of the once-esteemed Heritage Foundation has perfected the art of disrupting DC, whatever the cost":
By now a clear pattern is developing in how the liberal media cover Pope Francis. Step one: the pontiff makes frank, off-the-cuff comments in a speech or an interview which contains statements easy for the liberal media to misconstrue. Step two: the media do what they do best, misconstrue and spin the pope in order to hail him as a liberal who will reform the church in a leftward direction on the unholy trinity of concerns for the secular left: abortion, sexual ethics (particularly on homosexuality), and women in the priesthood. Step three, liberal activists within the church are given platforms in secular media outlets to caution that, no, Francis is not the liberal you hope he is, at least, not yet, but that with some gentle prodding maybe he can be won over.
The bishop of Rome's interview with La Civilta Cattolica -- accessible in English here at the Jesuit magazine America -- is the latest instance where we see this pattern playing out. Witness how Time magazine today gave a platform to liberal nun Sister Simone Campbell, who explained to readers "What Pope Francis Thinks About Women in the Church." Campbell began:
In Time’s “Ten Questions” interview in the September 23 edition, Time editor-at-large Belinda Luscombe asked Hugh Jackman about his new movie “Prisoners,” in which “Your character tortures a guy to try to find his kidnapped daughter.” Luscombe asked if this instinct kicks when his children are faced with the paparazzi.
Then Belinda – like Jackman, a native of Australia – went geopolitical and suggested this freaked-out-daddy torturer character is an appropriate metaphor for the United States:
A member of the MSM moving to the Obama administration? A "natural extension" indeed! Nancy Gibbs, the new Time editor, has really let the cat out of the bag. Appearing on Morning Joe today, she described the move of her predecessor, Rick Stengel, from Time to a State Department job in the Obama administration, as a "natural extension" for him.
Now it's true that Gibbs couched her remarks in terms of Stengel's role in both jobs being that of telling "America's story around the world." More accurately, Gibbs might have said that Stengel has always seen his job as telling Barack Obama's story in the most favorable light. View the video after the jump.
American kids are woefully behind the curve when it comes to courses of study in the STEM [Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math] fields, liberals love to tell us. To prepare our kids for success in a global economy, we need more federal involvement in education, they argue.
But heaven forbid the U.S. military be part of that solution, that might lead to a "militarization of young minds." "In its rush to find the next generation of cyberwarriors, the military has begun to infiltrate our high schools and even our middle schools, blurring the line between education and recruitment," Baruch College English professor Corey Mead groused in his September 17 blog post for Time magazine's Ideas blog headlined "Military Recruiters Have Gone Too Far." Mead pointed to "[t]he Air Force, for example," which "runs a 'CyberPatriot' national high school cyberdefense competition, geared toward influencing students to pursue careers in cybersecurity." He continues:
Thanks, Dylan Byers. You've done those who recognize liberal establishment press bias as an irrefutable reality a big favor.
The Politico media reporter's lengthy excerpt from a longer column — I'd call it a "tease," but it's 14 paragraphs — is entitled "Obama Loses the Media." That means Obama has had 'em in his pocket until now. The rumors of permanent loss are likely exaggerated. Several paragraphs from from the lengthy excerpt and the column itself follow the jump.
But rather than see a problem with the liberal media-Democratic administration revolving door, Jacobs's story was decidedly matter-of-fact. Indeed, he portrayed it more as the president "reaching out to journalists" rather than servile liberal scribes clamoring to jump aboard the Obama train and being received happily by the administration. What's more, as an excuse that "both sides do it," Jacobs closed by noting that the late Tony Snow is an example of the politics-journalism revolving door being a centuries-old bipartisan tradition:
Politico and Capital New York are reporting that Time managing editor Richard Stengel is stepping down from his news magazine job to join the Obama administration at the Department of State.
It’s not as powerful a job as held by Time’s Strobe Talbott, who became Bill Clinton’s Deputy Secretary of State. It’s the post of Under Secretary of State for Public Diplomacy and Public Affairs, "which includes communications with international audiences, cultural programming, academic grants, educational exchanges, international visitor programs, and U.S. Government efforts to confront ideological support for terrorism," according to the State Department's website.
While many in the media are actually crediting Barack Obama for Russian President Vladimir Putin's proposed Syrian chemical weapons "solution," TIME magazine's Joe Klein isn't one of them.
Far from it, Klein penned a scathing rebuke of Obama's handling of Syria Wednesday calling it "one of the more stunning and inexplicable displays of presidential incompetence that I’ve ever witnessed...The consequences of Obama’s amateur display ripple out across the world."
One does not simply destroy a nation's cache of chemical weapons. It's actually a rather complicated and expensive endeavor, despite how neat and simple the president's acolytes seem to be making it out to be. In fact, the United States government is decades into the process of eliminating American chemical weapons. What's more, the U.S. government is six years past its previous 2007 deadline -- not to mention 19 years past the initial 1994 deadline -- for 100 percent compliance.
Mark Thompson of Time magazine has a great piece today on "How To Destroy Syria’s Chemical Weapons" in which he looks at the painstakingly detailed logistical and cost considerations of eliminating a nation's stockpile of chemical weapons. Here's an excerpt (emphases mine):
When it comes to light that a prominent liberal Democrat has committed a series of sexual transgressions, there are two typical responses from media outlets: ignore the story and hope it goes away or spin it as best as they possibly can. The latter approach typically involves either highlighting how said politician and his wife are grappling with rebuilding their marriage and family or by virtually lamenting the emotional turmoil suffered by the adulterous pol as a result of his inability to control himself.
A textbook example of the latter was dutifully provided by Time magazine's Dan Kedmey in a September 9 post Swampland blog post headlined, "Report: In a Secret Journal, RFKJr. Records a Painful Struggle With 'Lust Demons.'"Kedmey picked up on a New York Post exclusive about a journal purportedly kept by Kennedy in which, "[o]n the days he resisted the temptation to have an affair, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. marked the occasion in his secret journal with a one-word exaltation: “Victory!” But on the days of defeat, the ink really began to flow across the page." Kedmey continued (emphasis mine):
While honoring Bradley Manning's wish to be identified as a woman and called "Chelsea," Time magazine writer James Poniewozik wants to know exactly when did Bradley become Chelsea, posing various grammatical issues raised by journalists accepting Manning's self-delusion about his gender.
"Since she’s a longtime figure in the news, in a case involving her actions years previous, how do you refer to her history? Did Bradley leak information to Wikileaks, or did Chelsea? (Or Breanna?) Did she serve in Iraq or did he?" Poniewozik wondered in an August 18 Tune In Time.com blog post, adding, "The answer goes to the question, still fuzzily defined, of what philosophy and definitions we’re using when referring to the growing number of transgender persons":
Readers are strongly advised to remove all fluids, flammables, and sharp objects from their computers' proximity as the following is likely to cause uncontrollable fits of laughter! You've been warned!
In the Yale College Writing Center's guide to what's considered a "scholarly source," the New York Times and Washington Post are depicted as having developed "a national or even worldwide reputation for fairness and accuracy" (emphasis added):
Wouldn’t it be great if Congress reinstated earmarks and started legislating from behind closed doors? That was the argument pushed by political reporter Zeke Miller in a Tuesday article on TIME.com’s Swampland page entitled “The Bipartisan Call to Bring Back the Smoke-Filled Room.” Miller presented a thoroughly one-sided view of the subject, refusing to acknowledge the considerable downside of a lack of legislative transparency.
According to Miller, this idea to resurrect the proverbial smoke-filled room is championed by Colorado’s liberal Democratic governor, "John Hickenlooper, a potential 2016 democratic [sic] candidate for president" who "has a creative — and controversial — idea for ending Washington, D.C.’s partisan gridlock: start legislating from behind closed doors and bring back the earmark.”
While most liberal media outlets have been positively giddy about Pope Francis's off-the-cuff remarks to the media about gay Catholics, Tim Padgett is having none of it, complaining, accurately, that the media have misconstrued the pontiff's comments. But Padgett's beef is not with inaccurate secular media outlets but with the church itself. "Catholic doctrine still vilifies homosexuality, and no amount of priestly 'love' makes that okay," huffed the sanctimonious headline to Padgett's July 30 story, "Pope Francis and Gays: 'Loving the Sinner' Is Still Intolerance."
"As TIME’s Stephen Faris has noted, while the Pope’s remarks might be a welcome and humane sentiment, they hardly represent a break with Catholic church doctrine, which still condemns homosexuality. The Vatican’s catechismal stance regarding the LGBTs in our midst remains the same: The church may love the sinner, but it hates the sin," complained Padgett in a post on the Time Ideas blog. Visitors to the main Time.com page were greeted this morning with a huge teaser headline which prompted readers to check out the piece, tagged as a "viewpoint" entry, not an objective news story [see screen capture below]:
Recent polls show Americans are perfectly okay with legislation being pursued in statehouses across the fruited plan to institute a ban on abortions occurring after the 20th week of pregnancy. This is despite a drumbeat of media puffery to glorify pro-choice absolutists like Texas State Sen. Wendy Davis (D) and to attack the successful pushes for abortion-regulating legislation in Ohio, North Carolina and Texas. So what's the liberal media to do as they are finding out their hard work has been for naught? Why, try to convince Americans that the pro-life movement is on the verge of a bitter civil war.
On July 24, Time magazine's Grace Wyler filed a story on how the "Personhood Movement Continues to Divide Pro-Life Activists." Wyler zeroes in on an isolated incident from Wisconsin to make her case. The core of her piece is summed up with this excerpt:
As the trial to determine if George Zimmerman committed a crime when he killed 17-year-old Trayvon Martin on Feb. 26, 2012, draws to a close, hundreds of people have threatened to riot over the verdict, and law-enforcement organizations in and around Broward County, Fla., have been coordinating efforts to have “a proper response plan” in case their worst fears are realized.
However, Time magazine columnist Marc Polite claims that the police have everything backwards since the pre-emptive call for calm “may be akin to racial fear-mongering" and “runs counter to recent history.”
Unwritten but widely understood rule among left wingers for media coverage of filibusters: when done by conservatives, death knell of democracy, obstruction for obstruction's sake, close cousin to fascism; when done by liberals, heroism personified, this is what democracy looks like, cue Jimmy Stewart in "Mr. Smith Goes to Washington."
It wasn't enough for leftward media types to enthuse this week about Texas state senator Wendy Davis's 11-hour filibuster against restrictions on abortion as allowed, inconveniently enough, by Roe v. Wade. Their gushing has extended ... to Davis's choice of footwear, Mizuno Wave Rider 16 running shoes.
On Thursday's The Last Word on MSNBC, during a segment with food activist Tom Colicchio, substitute host Alex Wagner raised the left-wing activist's stated desire that those who oppose his agenda be labeled as "pro-hunger" as she seemed sympathetic to the idea. Wagner:
Uncle Jesse isn’t quite so family-friendly as he used to be. John Stamos, who played “Uncle Jesse” in the family-oriented hit TV show “Full House,” is set to host a new show in which he prompts friends and celebrities to open up about their first sexual experience.
Entitled “Losing Your Virginity,” the new show is launching as a Yahoo! webseries in which Stamos interviews mostly-celebrity guests to reveal the details about their “first time.” Stamos is interested in whether his guest’s experiences were “a loss of innocence,” or humorous, or … (wait for it) … “love.” Although he insists it will not be graphic, he also suggested the show will re-create the guest’s loss-of-virginity experiences “with puppets or dolls or something – animated possibly.”