The world’s most pompous writer doesn’t like Andrew Breitbart

NPR’s Jack White’s goal isn’t to educate or elucidate, but to impress others with his own education and intellect. And he doesn’t like Andrew Breitbart.

We found a guy at NPR who doesn’t like Andrew Breitbart. Jack White’s a writer. One of those writers who writes and endlessly rewrites his words until he’s absolutely certain that the dolts who read them will say, “This guy sure is smart.” His goal isn’t to educate or elucidate, but to impress others with his own education and intellect.

We, of course, are mere bloggers, but we highly recommend that White enter the first sentence of his Breitbart article in the 2011 Edward George Earle Lytton Bulwer-Lytton Fiction Contest that honors bad opening sentences. We think he has a real shot at taking home the 2012 prize.

Without further delay, here is how White started his article at bias-free NPR.org:

bulwer-lytton
Edward George Earle Lytton Bulwer-Lytton, inspiration for NPR writer Jack White

It’s a pity that the 19th-century Austrian novelist Marie von Ebner-Eschenbach was not still around this week to witness a spectacular vindication of her most famous aphorism: Even a stopped clock is right twice a day. 

That old adage applies to Andrew Breitbart, the right-wing-media hit man previously best known for manufacturing a charge of racism that forced the heroic Shirley Sherrod to resign from the Department of Agriculture and for publicizing a highly edited sting videotape supposedly showing employees at the now defunct community organization ACORN advising a prostitute on how to avoid paying taxes. His track record establishes that Breitbart’s grasp of the facts is no firmer than Sarah Palin’s command of American history.

But in, er, exposing the eponymously named Rep. Anthony Weiner, Breitbart finally managed to hit his target. It will be a relief when Weiner finally realizes that he should resign from Congress and devote himself to his pregnant wife. He is an embarrassment.

Ahhh, yes. We, too, love 19th century Austrian novelists. The eponymously named Marie von Ebner-Eschenbach is one of our particular favorites. We can’t begin to tell you how many hours we’ve spent chortling at her droll observations on the human condition. Her aphorisms never cease to delight, just as Jack White’s words never ceases to annoy.

Sadly, we’re unable to quote any 19th century Austrian novelists, but to paraphrase the words of the Editor’s 20th century Dutch farmer father, “Jack White is the south end of a horse going north.”

Source: NPR.org, Bulwer-Lytton.com

Andrea Mitchell and Cokie Roberts: NPR needs money so rednecks and Indians can hear the news

NPR doesn’t appeal merely to liberal, big city elites. Heaven forbid. No, according to this line of reasoning, the very people liberal elites disdain the most are NPR’s most ardent fans.

In the wake of James O’Keefe’s devastating NPR sting, the mainstream media has apparently reached the “throw it up against the wall and see if it sticks” point. Its arguments in favor of continued funding are getting more desperate and less rational.

Cokie Roberts tried a novel approach on This Week last week:

Roberts: Well, there are not 14,000 radio stations in rural areas, which is where most of the federal funding goes. Most of those stations are the ones that NPR gets hardly any money from the federal government, and the big stations get hardly any money. But the little, tiny, rural stations that, where there’s nothing else on the air, get a lot of money and they would go dark.

andrea-mitchell
"Sure it's a stupid argument, but it's the only one I have."

MSNBC’s Andrea Mitchell took that line of reasoning a step or two further when she interviewed Majority Leader Eric Cantor last Wednesday:

Mitchell: I just want to point out that NPR and the radio stations are saying that the elimination of federal funding for public broadcasting would be extraordinarily damaging to the services that they provide in rural America, on Indian reservations. Not in the big cities, perhaps, as much where other kinds of fundraising is possible, private fundraising, but in a lot of poor communities, it’s their only news service.

Based on this argument, one can only assume that rednecks listen to “All Things Considered” as they drive their pickups around looking for black and gay men to lynch. And Native Americans listen to “Car Talk” while hand-grinding what we call corn, but they call maize.

In other words, NPR doesn’t appeal merely to liberal, big city elites. Heaven forbid. No, according to this line of reasoning, the very people liberal elites disdain the most are NPR’s most ardent fans.

Unfortunately, the network’s own website offers audience stats that put the lie to this inane argument.
npr-audience-demographics

So NPR’s audience is older, far richer and far more educated than the average American. Yet Roberts and Mitchell would have you believe that it’s poor, uneducated rural Americans who value NPR the most.

As NPR’s supposed redneck audience would say, “Bullshit.” As it’s supposed Native American audience would say, “Heap big bullshit.” And as it’s actual audience would say, “Please pass the Grey Poupon, Th0urston.”

Source: NPR, LexisNexis

These dogs won’t hunt: Doddering Harry Reid explains why NPR must be funded

Would someone find out if there’s a nice rest home in Searchlight, Nevada. If there is, would you be so kind as to reserve a room for Harry Reid?

Would someone find out if there’s a nice rest home in Searchlight, Nevada. If there is, would you be so kind as to reserve a room for Harry Reid?

Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) was speaking, giving kudos to participants in Alaska’s famous Iditarod dogsled race, when an increasingly doddering Harry Reid interrupted and asked for the floor:

“They had a really, really good piece on public radio before the start of the race,” Reid said. “I hesitate saying this because I know I will probably get in trouble, but this is a good reason why the House vote was bad today to defund public radio.”

According to NPR’s liberal supporters, its programming somehow manages to span an unspannable gap and appeal simultaneously to eastern elites and rural rednecks. It appeals to everyone, damn it.

Which, of course, raises the question, if it appeals to everyone why doesn’t it have better ratings?

Mush, you huskies. And mush for brains.

No kidding? NPR board members gave 89% of political donations to left wing candidates and groups

Does NPR lean to the left? Let’s answer that question with another question: Was Jimmy Carter a lousy President?

Does NPR lean to the left? Let’s answer that question with another question: Was Jimmy Carter a lousy President?

A new analysis of campaign finance documents shows that NPR’s board members have overwhelmingly supported Democrat candidates and other left wing groups. Unsurprising, perhaps, but interesting to see the actual numbers.

npr-target-logoUS News reveals the specifics:

Since 2004, members of the boards of NPR and the NPR Foundation, the public broadcaster’s fundraising arm, have contributed nearly $2.2 million to federal candidates, parties, and PACs, of which $1.95 million, or 89 percent, has gone to Democratic candidates and liberal-leaning political action committees.

Officers and trustees of the NPR Foundation, which has no control over the organization’s programming, have given substantially to national political campaigns in recent years. According to data from the Center for Responsive Politics, this group’s members (as listed on NPR’s most recent available annual report, from fiscal year 2008) have given almost $2.1 million to political campaigns in the last eight years. Fully 89 percent of this giving was to Democrats and progressive organizations. These figures include all federal contributions since the 2004 election cycle, the first in which “soft money” contributions were banned. “Soft money” refers to money given to a party for non-campaign activities, which until being banned in 2002 were unlimited and largely unregulated.

There’s a reason, apparently, that all those NPR stations are located on the left side of the dial.

Source: US News

Conservative? Nah. Libertarian? Nah. NPR’s interim CEO is a Democrat political donor.

File this one in the folder labeled “Least Surprising Things That Have Happened This Week.” NPR has whipped out its corporate cookie cutter and used it to replace disgraced CEO Vivian Schiller.

File this one in the folder labeled “Least Surprising Things That Have Happened This Week.” NPR has whipped out its corporate cookie cutter and used it to replace disgraced CEO Vivian Schiller.

The Daily Caller has the details:

If NPR is trying demonstrate in the wake of the video scandal that it embraces a diversity of viewpoints and is not the left-wing outlet it has been portrayed to be, its first move after the resignation of president and CEO Vivian Schiller isn’t a particularly good start.

After Schiller announced her resignation on Wednesday, the NPR Board of Directors promptly named Joyce Slocum as NPR’s interim CEO. According to a statement from NPR, Slocum’s appointment was part of a CEO succession plan adopted by the Board in 2009. Slocum, however, appears to be just another Democrat.

According to data from the Center for Responsive Politics website OpenSecrets.org, Slocum has donated $3,480 dating back to 1999 — all to Democratic candidates.

This barely qualifies as news. News would have been if they had hired someone who had even once in his or her life donated to a conservative. Or someone who would even admit to knowing one.

Yeah, if that were to happen NPR would be forced to do one of those “We interrupt this broadcast for this special news bulletin” announcements.

Source: Daily Caller

George Will states an undeniable truth: “NPR is run by people who don’t like people like me”

Jake Tapper, Cokie Roberts and George Will get together on ABC’s This Week to discuss last week’s revelations about NPR’s leftwing bias.

Jake Tapper, Cokie Roberts and George Will get together on ABC’s This Week to discuss last week’s revelations about NPR’s leftwing bias. Needless to say, Roberts and Will didn’t see eye to eye.

Tapper: Cokie, you’ve been at NPR for almost 40 years. Obviously this institution means a lot to you, but why should we care?

Roberts: Look, I should just say that they did then reject that money, and sent internal e-mails basically saying this is totally unacceptable. We have to have tax forms, all of that. So, that should be stated. But, look, we should care because 34 million people listen every week and want to get the news that you get there, that you can’t get any place else. NPR’s got seventeen foreign bureaus. That’s something you can’t say for any other broadcast organization these days. And brings you terrific information, day in and day out, week in and week out. And the reporters who are there on the line, being shot at in North Africa at the moment are being very badly served by the management that’s now gone.

Cokie, honey, the reason they have more foreign bureaus than any other network is because the American taxpayers give them $450,000,000 per year.

Tapper: George, very quickly.

Will: We learned this week redundantly that NPR is run by people who don’t like people like me. Which is fine. The problem is there are 14,000 radio stations in this country. The government shouldn’t be subsidizing neither entertainment, certainly not journalism. In fact, this is a solution in search of a problem.

Roberts: Well, there are not 14,000 radio stations in rural areas, which is where most of the federal funding goes. Most of those stations are the ones that, NPR gets hardly any money from the federal government, and the big stations get hardly any money. But the little, tiny, rural stations that, where there’s nothing else on the air, get a lot of money and they would go dark.

So we’re spending $450 million per year to subsidize NPR so that “little, tiny, rural stations” can broadcast to areas where virtually no one lives?

Take a few minutes, Cokie. We’re pretty sure you can come up with a better argument than that.

H/T: NewsBusters.org

Juan pissed off guy: Juan Williams responds to NPR sting video

One person probably found James O’Keefe’s NPR sting video even more remarkable than everyone else – former NPR political analyst Juan Williams.

One person probably found James O’Keefe’s NPR sting video even more remarkable than everyone else – former NPR political analyst Juan Williams.

The video shows NPR senior executive Ron Schiller denigrating everyone who’s anyone – the Tea Party, Jews and even Williams. Williams, who was unfairly fired (even according to disgraced NPR President Vivian Schiller), offered up this opinion.

“I think it is a look inside what NPR executives really think and for me this is a revelation in the sense that here they are saying exactly how they view the world,” Williams commented. “And what’s incredible to me is here they are doing business with people who identify themselves of the Muslim Brotherhood.”

Fine, Juan. Go ahead and pick on NPR all you want, but at least they won’t do business with those Tea Party guys. Because unlike the Muslim Brotherhood, they’re racists.

You know?

H/T: DailyCaller.com

That sound you hear is NPR quaking in its boots: GOP to force vote to defund

House Republicans announced Wednesday they plan to force a floor vote on defunding NPR in response to the firing of analyst Juan Williams last month.

NPR claims tax dollars provide a mere 1% of its budget despite other analyses that say it might be as much as 25%.

You’ll soon be able to judge which number is closer to the truth based on the volume of the squeals emanating from Congress. The louder the squeals, the higher the percentage.

npr-crosshairs
It's about time: Republicans are taking aim at the "P" in NRP

TheHill.com has the news that has NPR quivering with fear:

House Republicans announced Wednesday they plan to force a floor vote on defunding NPR in response to the firing of analyst Juan Williams last month.

House GOP Whip Eric Cantor (Va.) and Rep. Doug Lamborn (Colo.) said that cutting funds to the publicly subsidized news organization was the winner of the conference’s weekly “YouCut” contest, in which the public votes online on spending items they want eliminated.

“When NPR executives made the decision to unfairly terminate Juan Williams and to then disparage him afterwards, the bias of their organization was exposed,” the two Republicans said in a statement. “Make no mistake, it is not the role of government to tell news organizations how to operate. What is avoidable, however, is providing taxpayer funds to news organizations that promote a partisan point of view. Eliminating taxpayer funding for NPR is precisely the kind of commonsense cut that we have to begin making if we want to fundamentally alter the way business is conducted in Washington.”

Oh, wait. There’s another sound. If we’re not mistaken, this one is Juan Williams laughing his ass off.

Source: TheHill.com

Juan Williams and Bill O’Reilly put an exclamation point on the end of the NPR kerfuffle

Well, Juan Williams had an interesting 24 hours, didn’t he? First he was fired over the phone by NPR for comments he made on O’Reilly’s Fox TV show. Then he was immediately given a new $2 million contract by Fox.

Well, Juan Williams had an interesting 24 hours, didn’t he? First he was fired over the phone by NPR for comments he made on O’Reilly’s Fox TV show. Then he was immediately given a new $2 million contract by Fox.

His new millions not withstanding, Juan is pissed. And you can’t blame the guy.

As O’Reilly says on this clip, “NPR has now devolved into a totalitarian outfit functioning as an arm of the far left. As a corporation, has a right to do what it wants, but it does not have a right to any of our tax dollars. NPR will rue the day. Congress is going to defund NPR. We are not letting it go.“

O’Reilly = dog. NPR = bone.

Wouldn’t want to be bone.

H/T: TheRightScoop.com

1984 has come and gone but NPR is still working on Newspeak

According to Media Matters, NPR has graciously decided to stop using the labels “Pro-Life” and “Pro-Choice” because people may mistakenly believe that the “Pro-Life” people are the good guys.

npr logo
National Progressive Radio is "evolving" the language

According to Media Matters, NPR has graciously decided to stop using the labels “Pro-Life” and “Pro-Choice” because people may mistakenly believe that the “Pro-Life” people are the good guys.

After kicking around other labels for Pro-Life like “Those anti-abortion bastards”, NPR settled on “Abortion rights supporter(s) or advocate(s)” and “abortion rights opponent(s)”. NPR really likes this term because “rights opponent(s)” sounds a lot more nefarious than “pro-life”.

For those of you who might be thinking or even hoping that this is a joke, the following is excerpted from memo by NPR Managing Editor David Sweeney:

Continue reading “1984 has come and gone but NPR is still working on Newspeak”

Democrats reveal the truth about ObamaCare and your private insurance

Here is the truth about Obamacare, as spoken among friends by Barack Obama, NPR’s Julie Rovner, Rep. Jan Schakowsky and Yale professor Jakob Hacker, the architect of the ObamaCare sham.

Here it is. The truth as spoken among friends by Barack Obama, NPR’s Julie Rovner, Rep. Jan Schakowsky and Yale professor Jakob Hacker, the architect of the ObamaCare sham.

In the words of VerumSerum.com, “Jacob Hacker has been a key player in the formation of the public plan strategy, dating back over 5 years. We thought it was time someone shined some light on the ulterior motives embedded within his plan. The mainstream media has been well-aware of the historical players and developments related to the public plan option, and the fact that they have not been bringing all aspects of this to the public’s attention is yet another clear illustration of liberal media bias.”

Hoisted on their own petard. (We’ve always loved that phrase and would like to thank the Democrats for giving us this opportunity to use it).

Source: Verum Serum

Dumb Comment of the Day
“supper excited to find a site entitled ‘I Hate the Media’ but super disappointed to see how far to the right you swing. And come on, Miss California a strong woman? She lost and rightly so. I will continue in my search for unbiased media, until then, I will stick to the best source, NPR.”

Yup, that’s verbatim. We’re excited about supper, too. Mmmm, pot roast tonight.

If you like NPR, you’ll love the “Newspaper Revitalization Act”

Democrat senators are battling to see who can introduce this year’s stupidest proposal. Ben Cardin of Maryland has raced out to an early lead.

His “Newspaper Revitalization Act” would allow papers to convert into not-for-profit entities. Zap. They get big tax breaks. But Cardin justifies his nonsense by saying that the new non-profits would be prohibited from running editorials. You know, like NPR.

Obviously, Cardin’s bill is designed to give deep-pocketed Democrat Daddy Warbucks a chance to turn any paper into a tax-free source of promulgating propaganda.

Sure. Why not? After all, NPR follows that same basic business model and you can see how well it’s remained impartial while sucking at Washington DC’s distended teat.

Source: NewsBusters

NPR cuts newspaper subscriptions, still pays news anchors big bucks

You’ll be glad to know your tax dollars are being fiercely protected over at National Public Radio.

The publicly-supported broadcaster recognizes the tough times in which we live, so they’ve taken the radical step of slashing newspaper subscriptions from their budget. Here’s how the tragic news was broken to the staff:

As of April 1 NPR is canceling all newspaper subscriptions. We are making some arrangments to get the Wall Street Journal either on line or hard copy. You have until tomorrow to appeal this if there is a solid reason why you should be exempt. This is a cost saving measure company wide.

No word yet on whether they cut any of the exorbitant salaries paid to talent and producers. How exorbitant? How’s this:

Barbara Rehm, Managing Editor: $383,139
Robert Siegel, Host, All Things Considered: $350,288
Renee Montagne, Host, Morning Edition host: $332,160
Steve Inskeep, Host, Morning Edition: $331,242

Richard L. Harris, Afternoon Program Director: $190,267

So at a time when real world radio companies — those that don’t wallow in your tax dollars — are bleeding money, slashing salaries and laying off people left and right, NPR is cutting newspaper subscriptions.

Your tax dollars at work.

Source: NewsBusters.org

Another Washington DC child porn bust. This time it’s an ex-editor for NPR.

david_malakoff1Apparently, D.C. stands for “Disgusting Creep.” Last month it was a reporter for Fox News. This month it’s a former National Public Radio science editor.

Legal documents (click here to view) say David Malakoff has been charged with possessing child porn between April and June, 2008. He had been a science editor and on-air correspondent for the publicly-supported radio network until he “resigned” in June, 2008. Interesting juxtaposition of dates, we’d say.

Watch for more news as this dirt-o-rama develops in D.C.

NPR embarrassed by Juan Williams, taxpayers embarrassed by NPR

juan williamsNPR is supposed to stand for National Public Radio. But based on their latest flap with liberal commentator Juan Williams, the initials seem to stand for No Public Relations.

“Last year,” said Alicia Shepard, an NPR ombudsman, “378 listeners emailed me complaints and frustrations about things Williams said on Fox. The listener themes are similar: Williams ‘dishonors NPR.’ He’s an ‘embarrassment to NPR.’ NPR should severe their relationship with him.’”

Ellen Weiss, Vice President of News at NPR, is so concerned about it that she “has asked Williams to ask that Fox remove his NPR identification whenever he is on O’Reilly.”

All this simply because Williams occasionally deviates from the officially-scripted leftwing line.

In other news, NPR reported that 647 listeners complained that Lenin was too conservative, Marx was a rightwing lackey, and Mao was a fascist. All three have now asked O’Reilly to stop identifying them as communists.

I HATE THE MEDIA ™
Verified by MonsterInsights