The New York Times' fight for the economically dubious $15 minimum wage (and its related obsession with "income inequality") boiled over onto the front page the day after nationwide protests against fast-food companies by left-wing activists. The same reporter also challenged Hillary Clinton from the left, insisting she must embrace a $15 figure or risk losing "progressive" support.
Wages & Prices
Alec Baldwin, famous liberal actor (and public-radio talk show host at WNYC-FM), started a Twitter battle with fellow liberals about traffic-blocking protests in mid-town Manhattan on behalf of the "Fight for $15" minimum-wage demands. Occupy somewhere else, he seemed to proclaim to more than a million followers at his foundation's Twitter account.
In response to the far-left and union-led protests nationwide on Wednesday for a $15 minimum wage for fast-food and retail workers, NBC Nightly News applauded the protests with a glowing report that felt more like a campaign commercial. Disguised as a segment on the broader topic of income inequality, interim anchor Lester Holt and correspondent Stephanie Gosk led the way in offering no opposing viewpoint and largely downplayed the political motivations behind the event.
Cherry blossoms are blooming and as sure as a springtime rainstorm liberals are repeating false claims that women make significantly less than men do for the same work. Why? Discrimination, of course.
The feminist holiday Equal Pay Day is April 14, this year and already media outlets are marking it with complaints about how a “gender pay gap” concerns graduating women. Time ridiculously included a photo essay called “Life Before Equal Pay Day: Portrait of a Working Mother in the 1950s.”
Supposedly, Equal Pay Day marks the day a woman has to work to from the beginning of the previous year to make as much as a man. Those who claim there is a discriminatory wage gap continually claim women make only 77 cents, or 78 cents on the dollar compared to men. Politicians, including President Barack Obama, liberal media and left-wing activists repeat the claim often. But it’s a “bogus statistic,” that even some liberals call a “lie.”
Imagine you're a Cuban who has somehow managed to catch the cablecast of Melissa Harris-Perry's MSNBC show today. The topic is President Obama's opening toward Cuba. You're scraping by on the average Cuban monthly salary of $20/month and are thrilled at the prospect of getting a better-paying job if and when American tourists start coming in numbers.
Then suddenly you hear Harris-Perry fretting that there could be a "downside" for Cuba in letting in those American tourists. They could be a "plague" for Cuba. Impose their cultural "hegemony." !Ay caramba!
Chickens came home to roost yesterday at the Associated Press.
The AP, the economy's most consistent cheerleader when a Democrat is in office, has not only been ignoring and downplaying the significance of disappointing and negative reports for several months, pinning its claim that all is well on the streak of seasonally adjusted 200,000-plus job gains seen during the past 12 months. It has also been pretending that all is really well. Just a week ago, the wire service's Marin Crutsinger falsely touted how the economy's "growth spurt" since the recession ended 5-1/2 years ago, while "sluggish," has been "one of the most durable since World War II."
Timothy Egan, liberal New York Times reporter turned left-wing Times columnist, made Friday's paper accusing some conservative Republicans born disadvantaged as being "Traitors to Their Class." Egan's columns are typically online only, but the paper liked this one enough to feature in print. One can see why; it has the easy, superior mockery of Republicans who grew up poor but have the audacity to insist on free market solutions to poverty, as opposed to raising the minimum wage, and with a bloody Marxist edge: Not only are these Republicans wrong about economics but they are in fact "traitors to their class" who "actively despise the poor."
Apparently, the sheer number of weak to awful economic reports seen during the past month or so finally led Josh Boak at the Associated Press, aka the Administration's Press, to acknowledge that "critical pieces of the economy remain troubled almost six years into the recovery."
Boak's belated timing is interesting, to say the least, given that the Federal Reserve is weighing whether or not to raise interest rates for the first time in six years several months from now.
As we know - America’s media is for the most part decidedly Leftist, often befuddled and rarely right. So when they wade into an intricate issue like President Barack Obama’s Net Neutrality Internet power grab - we can only expect even more Leftism, befuddlement and wrongness.
On February 26, the Obama Administration’s Federal Communications Commission (FCC) pretended to be Congress and rewrote law. To suddenly start regulating the Internet under the 1934 Telecommunications Act - under rules written to regulate the landline telephone.
The business press's ability to keep up the appearances of "recovery is just around the corner" for over 5-1/2 years has been simultaneously amazing and disgusting. One of their strategies has been to define a "new normal" which is only presented that way because everyone knows deep-down that as long as the left controls economic policy, the nation's economy won't ever really get any better than it currently is. Another involves lowering the bar. An example of that would be the ridiculous new definition of full employment as representing an unemployment rate of 5.5 percent.
A third tactic, demonstrated in a Thursday Bloomberg report, is to feign ignorance.
After yesterday's government report on economic growth reduced the fourth quarter's originally estimated increase in gross domestic product from an annualized 2.6 percent to 2.2 percent, you just knew that the Associated Press, aka the Administration's Press, would try to ride to the rescue.
Late Friday afternoon, the AP's Martin Crutsinger gamely tried to concoct five reasons why we shouldn't worry our pretty little heads over a growth figure which confirms that the worst post-World War II recovery on record continues to be the worst post-World War II recovery on record. He only came up with four highly questionable reasons, while pretending he still had five (bolds and numbered tags are mine; I also numbered the reporter's reasons):
Who said: "I've always believed the decline of the middle class could be tied to the decline of unions. And when you have 7%, 8% of the work force in unions, when you have CEO pay going up to record heights, you're going to have a hollowing out of the middle class." Was it a. Elizabeth Warren; b. Robert Reich; or c. Ed Schultz?
Correct answer: d. None of the above. It was Joe Scarborough on today's Morning Joe. Scarborough prefaced his lament over the decline of unions by saying "It's been well-documented on Twitter: I'm a right-wing Republican stooge." Translation: to my liberal critics out there, see: my heart's in the right [left] place when it comes to unions.