History Facts: Media Bias, the Demise of Journalistic Integrity; Rise of the Smear Campaign

History Facts:

Media Bias, the Demise of Journalistic Integrity; Rise of the Smear Campaign

The 2016 Election and the Demise of Journalistic Standards

Hillsdale Imprimis Part 1

Michael Goodwin
The New York Post

I’ve been a journalist for a long time. Long enough to know that it wasn’t always like this. There was a time not so long ago when journalists were trusted and admired. We were generally seen as trying to report the news in a fair and straightforward manner. Today, all that has changed. For that, we can blame the 2016 election or, more accurately, how some news organizations chose to cover it. Among the many firsts, last year’s election gave us the gobsmacking revelation that most of the mainstream media puts both thumbs on the scale—that most of what you read, watch, and listen to is distorted by intentional bias and hostility. I have never seen anything like it. Not even close.

It’s not exactly breaking news that most journalists lean left. I used to do that myself. I grew up at The New York Times, so I’m familiar with the species.

History of Media Bias

For most of the media, bias grew out of the social revolution of the 1960s and ’70s. Fueled by the civil rights and anti-Vietnam War movements, the media jumped on the anti-authority bandwagon writ large. The deal was sealed with Watergate, when journalism was viewed as more trusted than government—and far more exciting and glamorous. Think Robert Redford in All the President’s Men. Ever since, young people became journalists because they wanted to be the next Woodward and Bernstein, find a Deep Throat, and bring down a president. Of course, most of them only wanted to bring down a Republican president. That’s because liberalism is baked into the journalism cake.

Promote Big Government, Not Report Truth

During the years I spent teaching at the Columbia University School of Journalism, I often found myself telling my students that the job of the reporter was “to comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable.” I’m not even sure where I first heard that line, but it still captures the way most journalists think about what they do.

Habit of thinking: Create Victim Groups

Translate the first part of that compassionate-sounding idea into the daily decisions about what makes news, and it is easy to fall into the habit of thinking that every person afflicted by something is entitled to help. Or, as liberals like to say, “Government is what we do together.” From there, it’s a short drive to the conclusion that every problem has a government solution.

The rest of that journalistic ethos—“afflict the comfortable”—leads to the knee-jerk support of endless taxation. Somebody has to pay for that government intervention the media loves to demand. In the same vein, and for the same reason, the average reporter will support every conceivable regulation as a way to equalize conditions for the poor. He will also give sympathetic coverage to groups like Occupy Wall Street and Black Lives Matter.

A New Dimension

I knew all of this about the media mindset going into the 2016 presidential campaign. But I was still shocked at what happened. This was not naïve liberalism run amok. This was a whole new approach to politics.

 In the beginning, Donald Trump’s candidacy was treated as an outlandish publicity stunt, as though he wasn’t a serious candidate and should be treated as a circus act. But television executives quickly made a surprising discovery: the more they put Trump on the air, the higher their ratings climbed. Ratings are money. So news shows started devoting hours and hours simply to pointing the cameras at Trump and letting them run.

As his rallies grew, the coverage grew, which made for an odd dynamic. The candidate nobody in the media took seriously was attracting the most people to his events and getting the most news coverage. Newspapers got in on the game too. Trump, unlike most of his opponents, was always available to the press, and could be counted on to say something outrageous or controversial that made a headline. He made news by being a spectacle.

Despite the mockery of journalists and late-night comics, something extraordinary was happening. Trump was dominating a campaign none of the smart money thought he could win. And then, suddenly, he was winning. Only when the crowded Republican field began to thin and Trump kept racking up primary and caucus victories did the media’s tone grow more serious.

One study estimated that Trump had received so much free airtime that if he had had to buy it, the price would have been $2 billion.

The realization that they had helped Trump’s rise seemed to make many executives, producers, and journalists furious. By the time he secured the nomination and the general election rolled around, they were gunning for him. Only two people now had a chance to be president, and the overwhelming media consensus was that it could not be Donald Trump. They would make sure of that.

The coverage of him grew so vicious and one-sided that last August I wrote a column on the unprecedented bias. Under the headline “American Journalism Is Collapsing Before Our Eyes,” I wrote that the so-called cream of the media crop was “engaged in a naked display of partisanship” designed to bury Trump and elect Hillary Clinton.

Historic Smear Campaign of a Presidential Candidate

The evidence was on the front page, the back page, the culture pages, even the sports pages. It was at the top of the broadcast and at the bottom of the broadcast. Day in, day out, in every media market in America, Trump was savaged like no other candidate in memory. We were watching the total collapse of standards, with fairness and balance tossed overboard. Every story was an opinion masquerading as news, and every opinion ran in the same direction—toward Clinton and away from Trump.

For the most part, I blame The New York Times and The Washington Post for causing this breakdown. The two leading liberal newspapers were trying to top each other in their demonization of Trump and his supporters. They set the tone, and most of the rest of the media followed like lemmings.

The Presidency as a First Job for an Outsider?

On one level, tougher scrutiny of Trump was clearly defensible. He had a controversial career and lifestyle, and he was seeking the presidency as his first job in government. He also provided lots of fuel with some of his outrageous words and deeds during the campaign.

But from the beginning there was also a second element to the lopsided coverage. The New York Times has not endorsed a Republican for president since Dwight Eisenhower in 1956, meaning it would back a dead raccoon if it had a “D” after its name. Think of it—George McGovern over Richard Nixon? Jimmy Carter over Ronald Reagan? Walter Mondale over Reagan? Any Democrat would do. And The Washington Post, which only started making editorial endorsements in the 1970s, has never once endorsed a Republican for president.

All Pretense of Fairness Dropped

But again, I want to emphasize that 2016 had those predictable elements plus a whole new dimension. This time, the papers dropped the pretense of fairness and jumped headlong into the tank for one candidate over the other. The Times media reporter began a story this way:

If you’re a working journalist and you believe that Donald J. Trump is a demagogue playing to the nation’s worst racist and nationalist tendencies, that he cozies up to anti-American dictators and that he would be dangerous with control of the United States nuclear codes, how the heck are you supposed to cover him? [But it was A-OK for Obama to cozy up to anti-American dictators? ~C.D.]

If you can’t be fair, you shouldn’t cover the candidate—Cover Sports or Entertainment

I read that paragraph and I thought to myself, well, that’s actually an easy question. If you feel that way about Trump, normal journalistic ethics would dictate that you shouldn’t cover him. You cannot be fair. And you shouldn’t be covering Hillary Clinton either, because you’ve already decided who should be president. Go cover sports or entertainment. Yet the Times media reporter rationalized the obvious bias he had just acknowledged, citing the view that Clinton was “normal” and Trump was not.

What happened to fairness? What happened to Journalistic Standards? New York Times Eliminated Them

I found the whole concept appalling. What happened to fairness? What happened to standards? I’ll tell you what happened to them. The Times top editor, Dean Baquet, eliminated them. In an interview last October with the Nieman Foundation for Journalism at Harvard, Baquet admitted that the piece by his media reporter had nailed his own thinking. Trump “challenged our language,” he said, and Trump “will have changed journalism.” Of the daily struggle for fairness, Baquet had this to say: “I think that Trump has ended that struggle. . . . We now say stuff. We fact check him. We write it more powerfully that [what he says is] false.”

Baquet was being too modest. Trump was challenging, sure, but it was Baquet who changed journalism. He’s the one who decided that the standards of fairness and nonpartisanship could be abandoned without consequence.

New Formula: Who, What, When, Where, and Why + OPINION

With that decision, Baquet also changed the basic news story formula. To the age-old elements of who, what, when, where, and why, he added the reporter’s opinion. Now the floodgates were open, and virtually every so-called news article reflected a clear bias against Trump. Stories, photos, headlines, placement in the paper—all the tools that writers and editors have—were summoned to the battle. The goal was to pick the next president.

Liberal Lies Never Exposed

Thus began the spate of stories, which continues today, in which the Times routinely calls Trump a liar in its news pages and headlines. Again, the contrast with the past is striking. The Times never called Barack Obama a liar, despite such obvious opportunities as “you can keep your doctor” and “the Benghazi attack was caused by an internet video.”

From Journalistic Integrity to Cheerleading

Indeed, the Times and The Washington Post, along with most of the White House press corps, spent eight years cheerleading the Obama administration, seeing not a smidgen of corruption or dishonesty. They have been tougher on Hillary Clinton during her long career. But they still never called her a liar, despite such doozies as “I set up my own computer server so I would only need one device,” “I turned over all the government emails,” and “I never sent or received classified emails.” All those were lies, but not to the national media. Only statements by Trump were fair game.

 

Advertisements

Christian News: Religious Freedom is Why Billy Graham’s Granddaughter is voting for Trump

Christian News:

Religious Freedom is Why Billy Graham’s Granddaughter is voting for Trump

A Graham explains why she’s voting for Trump

She’s the granddaughter of evangelist Billy Graham and the daughter of Franklin Graham – and she’s voting for Donald Trump.

key“Christians right now want to say they can’t vote for either candidate, [but] we can’t afford to sit out. This comes down to the Supreme Court and who’s going to protect my rights as a Christian and my religious freedoms.”

 

Cissie Graham Lynch says for her, it comes down to who sits on the Supreme Court – and that that’s why she says her brothers and sisters in Christ have to vote. “If there is only one reason for Christians to vote, this is it,” she writes. (Editor’s note: Well over half of 3,000 OneNewsNow readers who participated in a poll earlier this week agree, saying that vacancies on the Supreme Court will be foremost in their minds on Election Day.)

Following are excerpts from Lynch’s interview this morning on FOX News as well as a video of the program segment.

“Christians right now want to say they can’t vote for either candidate, [but] we can’t afford to sit out. This comes down to the Supreme Court and who’s going to protect my rights as a Christian and my religious freedoms.”

“This isn’t just an election for four to eight years – this is generational when it comes to the Supreme Court. Christians are being persecuted here; my faith is in Jesus Christ and Jesus Christ alone – and Christians are being persecuted every day. We need people who are going to stand firm for our religious beliefs, not attack the faith-based institutions; and who are going to fight for the unborn.”

“I look at who Trump has surrounded himself with. He has surrounded himself with some godly men [like] Ben Carson. But he’s chosen not just the counsel of Mike Pence but as his running mate. Mike Pence doesn’t just talk about his faith, he talks about his faith in Jesus Christ – and he is not ashamed of it. And I think Trump and Pence together will fight on behalf of the Christian voice.”

anti-hillary-pac-postcard“To listen to [Hillary Clinton] in those first five minutes [of the final debate] just candidly talk about [late-term] abortion. This is murder – and we are on a national stage just talking about it, [and she’s saying] that it’s okay and defending it. To me it was so vulgar.”

Similarly, Dr. Robert Jeffress of First Baptist Dallas says “staying at home” on Election Day isn’t an option for Christians – and like Cissie Graham Lynch, he cites the future makeup of the Supreme Court as a major reason.

 

A Graham explains why she’s voting for Trump

 

Election 2016: Christian Values at Stake; Vote for America, or lose Religious Freedom

Election 2016:

Christian Values at Stake; Vote for America, or lose  Religious Freedom

Think, pray, vote

Carolyn Reeves

war-on-christianityanti-hillary-pac-postcardNovember 2016 – American citizens espouse a variety of worldviews, the two major views being Judeo-Christian and secular humanism. Strangely, in recent years, the dominant culture-shaping forces have been from the minority views of secular humanism held by the leadership in fields such as entertainment, education, and often politics.

Humanists tend to have atheistic or agnostic religious beliefs and consider human reasoning and human solutions superior to biblical teachings and the laws of God. This has resulted in a number of secular laws and regulations legalizing such things as abortion, homosexual marriage, transgender “rights,” and required teaching in public schools that all life arose naturalistically.

When Christians fail to vote


GayPolitical-minoritiesChristians are often surprised when their beliefs are supplanted by ideas with which they strongly disagree.
In 2015, the conservative community of Charlotte, North Carolina, held city elections. According to Franklin Graham, 90% of the registered Christian voters in Charlotte failed to vote.

Subsequently, the city elected a mayor and a majority of aldermen who were activists for the LGBTQ lobby. One of their first orders of business was to pass a city ordinance requiring all businesses to allow men who believed their true gender was female to use all bathrooms, locker rooms, and dressing rooms of their choice. Women who believed their true gender was male were likewise permitted to use these spaces according to their perceived gender.

Biblical worldview losing impact


biblical-worldview2-christian
In recent years, Christians have seen the biblical worldview weakening as secular humanist worldviews have become stronger. Christians need first to recognize the conflicts between these worldviews.

Chapters 1-3 of Genesis establish some of the essentials of the Judeo-Christian worldview. God is proclaimed as the Creator of everything that exists, but today’s policies and laws have removed the terms God, design, and Creator not only from science books, but from schools in general. God’s design for the family – husband and wife; father and mother; parents and children; and male and female – are being redesigned by today’s social engineers.

Children in public schools are immersed in a secular worldview as Christian symbols and practices are being systematically eliminated: prayer before sporting events, Christian songs, Christmas and Easter events, and references to God even in personal essays.

Christian individuals, businesses, and churches are required to accept situations that violate their religious beliefs, such as attempts to force Christian religious organizations to pay for insurance that supplies abortion-causing drugs or to force private schools to allow transgender students to live in the dorm of their choice.

Being salt and light in the world

Jesus-bcome-disciple-lds-churchJesus told His disciples to be salt and light in the world. This can still be done as churches show the love, power, and truth of Christ to their local communities and abroad and pray earnestly for a God-breathed sweeping revival that would change hearts.

While national elections are very important, another critical way to bring salt and light into our local communities is to be sure that Christians are a part of local government and other policy-making bodies. Christians can affect the governing of their communities as they:

(1) Register to vote and exercise this right in every election.
(2) Consider joining or seeking an appointment to groups such as the library board; park
commission; parent/teacher groups; city, county, and school committees; political committees; and other decision-making groups.
(3) Write, call, or talk with officials about issues you consider important. As a Christian, always make your views known in a Christian manner.
(4) In every race where possible, support, campaign, pray, and vote for an honest, dependable candidate whose life, record, and commitment reflect Christian moral values.

Read an expanded version of this article at her website: undergroundparadigm.com.

Election 2016: Obama, Clinton, and Corruption, Abuse of Power

These People Do Not Deserve to Be Allowed to continue their Corruption and Abuse of Power

Rush Limbaugh

See Also:

Ben Garrison

Ben Garrison

Trump Campaign: McAuliffe’s Donation to FBI Official’s Wife ‘Deeply Disturbing’

RNC: ‘Down Payment to Influence’ Investigation

WSJ: Terry McAuliffe Sent Big Bucks to Wife of FBI Official Involved in Clinton Email Case

If Elected Hillary Will Be Literal Death to Millions of Unborn Babies

 

cartoon-clinton-dummies-millennialsRUSH: You wouldn’t believe how many Millennials literally believe, folks… I’m telling you, I read it in my tech blogs.  You wouldn’t believe how many of these little kids do not think that the life that they know — life itself — is gonna be livable.

The planet is not gonna be habitable when they hit 65!  They actually believe this.  Journalist, blogger tech people — 25/30-year-old Millennials — they actually believe this.  And they believe in nonsense explanations for it.  Too much carbon in the atmosphere, fracking, oil production, SUVs being driven around.  They really believe if we don’t find a way to get to Mars in 50 years, that the human race will die out.  They really believe it! I mean, this is… It’s insane!

And, of course, we don’t have an opposition party that dares speak up about any of this.  It’s left to us to do it.  And, of course, the left doesn’t want to hear any opposition to this.  They want to steamroller everybody. So we end up taking the arrows for all of this.  I don’t care, folks.  It’s just… This is near criminal what is being done to the great economy, the great health care system, and to the people of this country.

And the people who have made this mess, from the college education to health care, have no right… They do not deserve to be reelected. They do not deserve to stay in power. They do not deserve four more years or eight more years to continue this destruction of what once was the greatest country in the history of humanity, and yet it looks like they’re on the verge of being reelected.

cartoon-hillary-mountain-mole-hill

Thanks to A.F. Branco at Legal Insurrection for his great cartoons

RUSH:  Yeah, yeah, I know.  There’s some conservatives out there who, despite all of this going on — and they know full well all of this is going on.  They know what’s happening to health care; they know what’s happening via climate change; they know the designs that the left in this country and Hillary Clinton, they know the designs these people have on power and total control, owning the Supreme Court. And even that is not enough for some them to join us in trying to beat Hillary Clinton because it involves supporting Donald Trump.  They can’t embarrass themselves to actually support or recommend Trump, so you balance things out and it apparently is judged to be better to let Hillary continue the Obama administration march on America than to stop it. 

Now, I would ask you what good is the conservative movement if that’s the choice some of its leaders make?  But that’s a subject for another day.  And, believe me, that’s gonna come up.  Whether Trump wins this or loses this, this internecine war is still in the skirmish stage compared to where these people want to take it.

Election 2016: Trump First 100 Days Plan–America First; Repeal Obamacare, Obama Executive Orders; constitutional Supreme Court Justices

Election 2016:

Trump First 100 Days Plan–America First; Repeal Obamacare, Obama Executive Orders; constitutional  Supreme Court Justices

trump-thumbAs your President, I will not waste any time, but immediately begin working to Make America Great Again.

As soon as I enter the White House on January 20, 2017, I will begin implementing my 8-Point Plan for the First 100 Days of the Trump Administration, and here’s what we’ll do:

  1. On Day One, we will roll out our plan to BUILD THE WALL, send criminal illegal immigrants home, and finally end the open borders nightmare.
  2. Begin renegotiating ALL unfair trade deals like NAFTA which have undercut American employment and exported our prosperity.
  3. CANCEL all executive orders, bureaucratic rules, and crippling regulations that send American jobs overseas.repeal-obamacare
  4. Work with Congress to REPEAL and replace the disastrous ObamaCare legislation that is ruining American healthcare.
  5. Lift the radical Obama regulations on America’s energy industry to END our dependence on foreign sources and create new jobs here at home.capitalism
  6. Propose, pass, and sign into law a massive TAX CUT for all working Americans and unleash the jobs-creating power of our small businesses.
  7. NOMINATE Supreme Court Justices who will uphold the Founders’ Constitution and not legislate the liberal agenda from the bench, and…constitution1
  8. IMPOSE strict new ethics integrity2rules to restore the integrity of the Office of the Secretary of State.

Election 2016: Obama, Hillary Clinton State Dept. linked to Planned Parenthood selling Baby Parts

Election 2016:

Obama, Hillary Clinton State Dept.  linked to Planned Parenthood selling Baby Parts

reagan-quote-abortionkeyWanted: A millstone big enough for these barbarian, demonic  butchers.

‘Pay to Slay’: Hillary link to baby body-parts biz revealed

Fugitive pair selling human tissue aided by Clinton State Department

Bob Unruh

planned-parenthood-clinton-democrat-fundingIt’s a new bombshell in the scandal that horrified Americans as they learned unborn babies had their body parts harvested and sold around the world: the discovery that Hillary Clinton’s State Department granted favorable treatment to a family involved in the harvesting.

hillary-planned-parenthood-abortionThe federal agency expedited the immigration of the Isaias family, whose ownership of the DaVinci Biosciences and DV Biologics companies made headlines again recently when the district attorney in Orange County brought a criminal lawsuit against them.

The baby body-parts trade was highlighted in 2015 in a series of  hidden-camera videos produced by the Center for Medical Progress, or CMP.

CMP said that for eight years, Planned Parenthood “supplied aborted baby hearts, lungs, brains, and intestines to DV Biologics, which DV Biologics then resold for profit.”

“In exchange for merely providing access to aborted baby body parts, Planned Parenthood received kickback contributions from DaVinci Biosciences over the course of their eight-year contract,” CMP said.

“The wheels of justice are beginning to turn against Planned Parenthood and their corrupt business partners in the illicit trade planned-parenthood-govin aborted baby body parts. Planned Parenthood is not above the law, and law enforcement and elected representatives everywhere must now hold Planned Parenthood accountable for their barbaric profiteering off of pregnant women and the body parts of their aborted children.”

Kristan Hawkins of Students for Life of America said the Orange County district attorney “should be commended for suing Planned Parenthood’s business partners.

“Hopefully this lawsuit is the beginning of the unraveling of the entire for-profit fetal tissue industry, one that Planned Parenthood has played a key role in for years,” Hawkins said.

Read the tested and proven strategies to defeat the abortion cartel, in “Abortion Free: Your Manual for Building a Pro-Life America One Community at a Time.”

The details of the Isaias’ family’s links to the Obama administration and Clinton’s State Department were investigated by the pro-life group Operation Rescue, whose president, Troy Newman, is on the board of the Center for Medical Progress.

OR reported, under the headline “‘Pay to Slay:’ Foreign crime family reached Hillary Clinton for immigration favors so they could run a baby parts harvesting business,” the Isaias brothers – Roberto, William and Estefano Sr – “sought asylum in the U.S. in 2008, after looting millions of dollars from an Ecuadorian bank.”

They and family members now are listed as principals of the two California companies targeted by prosecutors.

“During that time, the family made hundreds of thousands of dollars in contributions to Democratic and Republican political campaigns. Family members gave roughly $300,000 to Democrat politicians alone and reached out to Hillary Clinton thru (sic) her aide, Cheryl Mills,” the report said. “In return, the family received favorable treatment from the Obama administration and State Department under Clinton, which expedited their immigration into the U.S.”

It cited documentation from the New York Times, which profiled the “wealthy brothers” in 2014.

“The two men, Roberto and William Isaias are fugitives from Ecuador, which has angrily pressed Washington to turn them over, to no avail,” the Times said. “A year after their relatives gave $90,000 to help re-elect Mr. Obama, the administration rejected Ecuador’s extradition request for the men, fueling accusations that such donations were helping to keep the brothers and their families safely on America soil.”

The report explained the brothers were sentenced in absentia in Ecuador to eight years in prison for a “scheme to run a bank into the ground by making loans to businesses they controlled and then presenting false balance sheets to get bailout funds. Ecuador says it lost more than $400 million.”

Their donations, actually from the fugitives’ spouses and children, went to Sen. Robert Menendez, D-N.J., Rep. Joe Garcia, D-Fla., Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, R-Fla., Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., and others, the report said.

Operation Rescue said the Clinton-led State Department “resisted numerous requests by Ecuador to extradite the Isaias brothers back to their native country to face punishment.”

The two companies now are facing a claim from District Attorney Tony Rackauckas for $1.6 million for profiting from the illegal sale of aborted baby remains, OR said.

obama-abortion-p-parenthood“Some call the buying of influence ‘Pay to Play’ or “Pay to Stay,’ In the case of the Isaias family, I call it ‘Pay to Slay,’” said Newman.

The case contends that the Isaias companies “had no problem procuring on a regular basis tissue of aborted babies, including hearts, lungs, kidneys, brains, intestines, skeletal muscle and bones.”

“The tissue and often stem cells derived from the tissue was marked up ten times over costs, and sometimes more, creating a profitable revenue stream for the Isaias family,” OR said.

Read the tested and proven strategies to defeat the abortion cartel, in “Abortion Free: Your Manual for Building a Pro-Life America One Community at a Time.”

Hawkins commented that if a California district attorney “can file suit for illegally profiting off of baby body parts, there’s no excuse for law enforcement in other parts of the country not to do their jobs and put a stop to this criminal activity.”

CMP originally reported, when the video was released, on a conversation between Jennifer Russo of the Planned Parenthood organization and undercover journalists from CMP.

“Russo confirms that her Planned Parenthood affiliate is currently working with a local biotech company to supply aborted fetal body parts: ‘Yeah, it’s DaVinci,’ she states. DaVinci Biosciences, LLC, and its sister company, DV Biologics, LLC, are located in Orange County, CA and have been partnered with the local Planned Parenthood affiliate since 2008. Planned Parenthood Orange & San Bernardino Counties’ 2008 Annual Report lists Da Vinci Biosciences as one of the major financial donors to the abortion group,” CMP said.

Russo said, “They take the whole specimen.”

Invoices revealed Da Vinci Biosciences charged $350 for fetal liver, $500 for fetal thymus and $750 for fetal brain.

But CMP said the sale or purchase of human fetal tissue is a federal felony punishable by up to 10 years in prison and a fine of up to $500,000.”

The local Orange County Register reported the case was brought in Orange County Superior Court and alleges the companies “advertised and sold hundreds of units of fetal tissue and stem cells to research facilities around the world, collecting hundreds of thousands of dollars in revenue.”

Rackauckas said, according to the paper, that the companies treated human parts as commodities.

“This case is not about whether it should be lawful to sell fetal parts or whether fetal tissue research is ethical or legal,” he said in the report. “This lawsuit is aimed at taking the profit out of selling body parts.”

In the first undercover video released by CMP, Deborah Nucatola of Planned Parenthood commented on crushing babies.

planned-parenthood-baby-parts“We’ve been very good at getting heart, lung, liver, because we know that, so I’m not gonna crush that part, I’m gonna basically crush below, I’m gonna crush above, and I’m gonna see if I can get it all intact,” she said.

In the second video, Planned Parenthood’s Mary Gatter said, “I want a Lamborghini.”
In the fifth, Melissa Farrell of Planned Parenthood’s Houston clinic discusses “intact fetal cadavers”:
The seventh video has the testimony of a Planned Parenthood worker who tapped an aborted infant’s heart and saw it start beating.
And No. 8 has Cate Dyer, CEO of Stem Express, admitting Planned Parenthood sells fully intact aborted babies.
Read more at

http://www.wnd.com/2016/10/hillary-linked-to-baby-body-parts-scandal/

 

planned-parenthood-founderBlack Leaders: Hillary Clinton’s ‘Unconscionable Silence’ Over Black Abortionhillary-clinton-margaret-sanger

 

Theologian Michael Novak: For Catholics, Hillary Is Simply ‘Unvotable’

 

 

 

Election 2016: Hillary Clinton Inner Circle concerned about Hillary’s Mental Health Issues

Election 2016:

Hillary Clinton Inner Circle concerned about Hillary’s Mental Health Issues

‘Head Space’: How Hillary Clinton’s Inner Circle Tiptoes Around Her Health Issues

Ezra Dulis

cartoon-hillary_bingo_ben_garrisonHillary Clinton’s top campaign officials regularly discuss and assess the Democratic presidential candidate’s mental well-being, according to several conversations seen in Wikileaks’ release of campaign chairman John Podesta’s purported email accounts.

Monday’s new batch of emails revealed a new thread, flagged by The American Mirror, showing that Clinton’s state of mind worried Podesta enough to reach out to the campaign’s Communications Director Jennifer Palmieri — presumably because she was face-to-face with Clinton.

Podesta’s message simply says “How bad is her head?” under the subject heading “Any sense of whether and when she wants to talk?”

Podesta’s phrasing here calls to mind a term that the campaign’s inner circle uses several other times in these emails: “head space.” They drop this term in reference to Clinton’s mental focus, her memory for stump speech lines and talking points, or her ability to handle a task.

Minimizing Distress

However, Abedin does not always use the term positively. In July 2015, she relays that Clinton feels “overwhelmed” by the prospect of babysitting her granddaughter:

[S]he is a bit overwhelmed with picking [Chelsea Clinton’s daughter] Charlotte up to babysit her for the week. Oscar [Flores, who manages the Clinton’s Chappaqua home] got a stomach virus and they have been santizing [sic] the house all day so that the baby can be there. WJC [Bill Clinton] was out buying clorox wipes yesterday! so she hasnt [sic] been in the best head space. [emphasis added]

Clinton’s top staffers cite “head space” as a reason to delay or skip interviews with the press. An email thread from August 2015 shows Palmieri suggesting a media strategy for damage control on the investigation into Clinton’s unsecured private email server:

Beyond unscripted events, Clinton’s inner circle expresses concern about her ability to handle bad news or stressful situations.

Head Space’: How Hillary Clinton’s Inner Circle Tiptoes Around Her Health Issues

 

Election 2016: Republican, Democratic Party Platforms

Election 2016:

Republican, Democratic Party Platforms

afa-politicalparties10 key issues … taken directly from official party platforms*

democrats.org/party-platform
 gop.com/the-2016-republican-party-platform

Rusty Benson

Associate Editor, American Family Association Journal

Human Life


liberal-compassion-abortionDemocratic Party
Democrats are committed to protecting and advancing reproductive health, rights, and justice. We believe unequivocally that every woman should have access to quality reproductive health care services, including safe and legal abortion – regardless of where she lives, how much money she makes, or how she is insured. We believe that reproductive health is core to women’s, men’s, and young people’s health and wellbeing. …We will continue to oppose – and seek to overturn – federal and state laws and policies that impede a woman’s access to abortion, including by repealing the Hyde Amendment. (p.37)
abortion3-pro-lifeRepublican Party
The Constitution’s guarantee that no one can “be deprived of life, liberty or property” deliberately echoes the Declaration of Independence’s proclamation that “all” are “endowed by their Creator” with the inalienable right to life. Accordingly, we assert the sanctity of human life and affirm that the unborn child has a fundamental right to life which cannot be infringed. We support a human life amendment to the Constitution and legislation to make clear that the Fourteenth Amendment’s protections apply to children before birth. (p.13)

Planned Parenthood


Democratic Party
obama-abortion-p-parenthood
We will continue to stand up to Republican efforts to defund Planned Parenthood health centers, which provide critical health services to millions of people. (p.37)
reagan-quote-abortionRepublican Party
We oppose the use of public funds to perform or promote abortion or to fund organizations, like Planned Parenthood,
so long as they provide or refer for elective abortions or sell fetal body parts rather than provide health care. (p.13)

 

Judges


Democratic Party
obamatearing-constitution
We will appoint judges who defend the constitutional principles of liberty and equality for all, protect a woman’s right to safe and legal abortion, curb billionaires’ influence over elections because they understand that Citizens United has fundamentally damaged our democracy, and see the Constitution as a blueprint for progress. (p.25)
judicialtyrannyRepublican Party
We support the appointment of judges who respect traditional family values and the sanctity of innocent human life. We condemn attempts by activist judges at any level of government to seize the power of the purse from the people’s elected representatives by ordering higher taxes. (p.13)

Religious Liberty


Democratic Party

election-quote6-dem-vs-godDemocrats know that our nation, our communities, and our lives are made vastly stronger and richer by faith in many forms and the countless acts of justice, mercy, and tolerance it inspires. We believe in lifting up and valuing the good work of people of faith and religious organizations and finding ways to support that work where possible. (p.19)
church-state3-first-amendmtRepublican Party
We value the right of America’s religious leaders to preach, and Americans to speak freely, according to their faith. Republicans believe the federal government, specifically the IRS, is constitutionally prohibited from policing or censoring speech based on religious convictions or beliefs, and therefore we urge the repeal of the Johnson Amendment. (p.11)

Education/School Choice
Democratic Party
commoncoreDemocrats are also committed to providing parents with high-quality public school options and expanding these options for low-income youth. We support democratically governed, great neighborhood public schools and high-quality public charter schools, and we will help them disseminate best practices to other school leaders and educators. Democrats oppose for-profit charter schools focused on making a profit off of public resources. (p.34)

common core opponents

common core opponents

Republican Party
We support options for learning, including home-schooling, career and technical education, private or parochial schools, magnet schools, charter schools, online learning, and early-college high schools. We especially support the innovative financing mechanisms that make options available to all children: education savings accounts (ESAs), vouchers, and tuition tax credits. (p.34)

Sex Education


abortion-pp-moneyDemocratic Party
We recognize that quality, affordable comprehensive health care, evidence-based sex education, and a full range of family planning services help reduce the number of unintended pregnancies. (p.37)
abstinence-mychoiceRepublican Party
We renew our call for replacing “family planning” programs for teens with sexual risk avoidance education that sets abstinence until marriage as the responsible and respected standard of behavior. (p.34)

 

Obamacare


obamacaresocialismDemocratic Party
Thanks to the hard work of President Obama and Democrats in Congress, we took a critically important step towards the goal of universal health care by passing the Affordable Care Act (ACA), which has offered coverage to 20 million more Americans and ensured millions more will never be denied coverage on account of a pre-existing condition. (p.34)
repeal-obamacareRepublican Party
Any honest agenda for improving health care must start with repeal of the dishonestly named Affordable Care Act of 2010: Obamacare. …To simplify the system for both patients and providers, we will reduce mandates and enable insurers and providers of care to increase health care options and contain costs. (p.36)

Marriage


Democratic Party
GayPolitical-minorities
Democrats applaud last year’s decision by the Supreme Court that recognized LGBT people – like every other American – have the right to marry the person they love. But there is still much work to be done. … Democrats will fight for the continued development of sex discrimination law to cover LGBT people. We will also fight for comprehensive federal non-discrimination protections for all LGBT Americans … . (p.19)
familydefendmarriage1Republican Party
We condemn the Supreme Court’s ruling in United States v Windsor, which wrongly removed the ability of Congress to define marriage policy in federal law. We also condemn the Supreme Court’s lawless ruling in Obergefell v Hodges. … In Obergefell, five unelected lawyers robbed 320 million Americans of their legitimate constitutional authority to define marriage as the union of one man and one woman. (p.11)

Biomedical Research


abortion-embryoDemocratic Party

Democrats believe we must accelerate the pace of medical progress, ensuring that we invest more in our scientists and give them the resources they need to invigorate our fundamental studies in the life sciences in a growing, stable, and predictable way. …We recognize the critical importance of a fully funded National Institutes of Health to accelerate the pace of medical progress. (p.36)
anti-cloningRepublican Party
We call for expanded support for the stem cell research that now offers the greatest hope for many afflictions – through adult stem cells, umbilical cord blood, and cells reprogrammed into pluripotent stem cells – without the destruction of embryonic human life. We urge a ban on human cloning for research or reproduction, and a ban on the creation of, or experimentation on, human embryos for research. (p.37-38)

Iran


cartoon-obama-Iran-ATM-600Democratic Party

We support the nuclear agreement with Iran because, if vigorously enforced and implemented, it verifiably cuts off all of Iran’s pathways to a bomb without resorting to war. (p.43)
obama-treasonRepublican Party
We consider the Administration’s deal with Iran, to lift international sanctions and make hundreds of billions of dollars available to the Mullahs, a personal agreement between the President and his negotiating partners. … Because of it, the defiant and emboldened regime in Tehran continues to sponsor terrorism across the region, develop a nuclear weapon, test-fire ballistic missiles inscribed with “Death to Israel,” and abuse the basic human rights of its citizens. A Republican president will not be bound by it. (p.46)

 

Election 2016: Donald Trump, Supreme Court Justices, and American Survival

Election 2016:

Donald Trump, Supreme Court Justices, and American Survival

21 reasons NeverTrumpsters might want to vote for Trump

Trump beefs up list of Supreme Court candidates

‘Constitutional values and principles our country was founded on are in jeopardy’

Antonin Scalia, supreme Court Justice

Antonin Scalia, supreme Court Justice

GOP presidential candidate Donald Trump beefed up his list of possible nominees to the U.S. Supreme Court, adding the names of two more judges from Colorado and the junior senator from Utah in an effort to convince voters he would put a judge on the bench in the mold of the late Justice Antonin Scalia.

“We have a very clear choice in this election. The freedoms we cherish and the constitutional values and principles our country was founded on are in jeopardy,” he said.

He earlier listed about a dozen possible nominees, when he provided names that made up a star-studded assembly of jurists strong on individual rights and constitutional principles.

Fox News commentator Judge Andrew Napolitano described them as “serious” candidates.

Two of the newly added names are from Colorado, and also listed is the junior senator from Utah, giving the list an emphasis on the West.

“The responsibility is greater than ever to protect and uphold these freedoms and I will appoint justices, who like Justice Scalia, will protect our liberty with the highest regard for the Constitution,” Trump added. “This list is definitive and I will choose only from it in picking future justices of the United States Supreme Court.

“I would like to thank the Federalist Society, The Heritage Foundation and the many other individuals who helped in composing this list of 21 highly respected who are the kind of scholars that we need to preserve the very core of our country, and make it greater than ever before.”

Read the history of the attacks on marriage and the family, from the days of Karl Marx and Margaret Sanger to those now pushing for mandatory recognition of same-sex “marriage,” in “Takedown: From Communists to Progressives, How the Left has Sabotaged Family and Marriage.”

At issue is the growing progressive bent of the Supreme Court, with the expectation Hillary Clinton, as president, would follow the lead of Barack Obama in appointing justices like Elena Kagan and Sonio Sotomayor, who voted to create same-sex “marriage” in the nation despite the Constitution’s silence on the issue.

justice3-courthouseIn fact, Kagan had publicly endorsed the idea while the issue was pending before the court by performing same-sex “weddings,” and then refused a request to sit out the decision, which was criticized by top legal experts as unconnected to the Constitution, because of her bias.

For now, the high court is split 4-4 ideologically. Critics fear that the wrong appointee could actually facilitate the demise of, for example, the Second Amendment across the U.S.

Trump, on the other hand, is trying to assure Americans his justices will follow the Constitution and the law.

Among the additions to Trump’s list are Timothy Tymkovich and Neil Gorsuch, both on the 10th U.S. Court of Apeals in Denver. Both were appointed by President George W. Bush and the Colorado Independent describes them as conservative.

That report noted Trump’s running mate, Mike Pence, was in Colorado and warned people to think about what a court nominated by Hillary Clinton would do.

justice“We’re electing a president for the next four years and that president is probably going to set a course of direction of the Supreme Court of the United States for the next 40 years,” Pence said. “You better think about that real hard, Colorado.”

Also added to Trump’s list was Sen. Mike Lee of Utah, the only nonjurist to be added.

Trump earlier had named Colorado Supreme Court Justice Allison Eid as a potential candidate.

The additions to list, and their biographies, from the Trump campaign:

  • Keith Blackwell is a justice of the Supreme Court of Georgia. He was appointed to the position in 2012. He had previously served on the Court of Appeals of Georgia. Before serving on the bench, Justice Blackwell was a deputy special attorney general of the State of Georgia, an assistant district attorney in Cobb County, and a commercial litigator in private practice. Justice Blackwell is a graduate of the University of Georgia School of Law.
  • Charles Canady is a justice of the Supreme Court of Florida. He has served in that role since 2008, and he served as the court’s chief justice from 2010 to 2012. Prior to his appointment, Justice Canady served as a judge of the Florida Second District Court of Appeal and as a member of the United States House of Representatives for four terms. Justice Canady is a graduate of Yale Law School.
  • Neil Gorsuch is a judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit. He was appointed to the position in 2006. Judge Gorsuch previously served in the Justice Department as a deputy assistant attorney general. Judge Gorsuch was a Marshall Scholar and received his law degree from Harvard. He clerked for Justices Byron White and Anthony Kennedy.
  • Mike Lee is the junior U.S. senator from Utah and currently serves on the Senate Judiciary Committee. He has previously served as an Assistant U.S. Attorney in Utah and as a Supreme Court Clerk for Justice Alito.
  • Edward Mansfield is a justice of the Iowa Supreme Court. He was appointed to the court in 2011 and retained by voters in 2012. Justice Mansfield previously served as a judge of the Iowa Court of Appeals. He also teaches law at Drake University as an adjunct professor. Justice Mansfield is a graduate of Yale Law School.
  • Federico Moreno is a judge of the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida and a member of the Judicial Conference of the United States. He previously served as a state and county court judge in Florida. Judge Moreno is a graduate of the University of Miami School of Law.
  • moses-supreme-court1Margaret A. Ryan has been a judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces since 2006. Judge Ryan served in the Marine Corps through deployments in the Philippines and the Gulf War. She then attended Notre Dame Law School through a military scholarship and served as a JAG officer for four years. Judge Ryan clerked for Judge J. Michael Luttig of the Fourth Circuit and Justice Clarence Thomas.
  • Amul Thapar is a judge of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky, serving since his appointment in 2007, when he became the first South Asian Article III judge. He has taught law students at the University of Cincinnati and Georgetown. Judge Thapar has served as an Assistant U.S. Attorney in Washington, D.C. and the Southern District of Ohio. Immediately prior to his judicial appointment, Judge Thapar was the U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Kentucky. Judge Thapar received his law degree from the University of California, Berkeley.
  • Timothy Tymkovich is the chief judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit. Judge Tymkovich was appointed to the bench in 2003. He previously served as Colorado Solicitor General. Judge Tymkovich is a graduate of the University of Colorado College of Law.
  • Robert Young is the chief justice of the Supreme Court of Michigan. He was appointed to the court in 1999, and became part of a majority of justices who embraced originalism and led what one scholar described as a “textualism revolution.” Justice Young previously served as a judge on the Michigan Court of Appeals. Chief Justice Young is a graduate of Harvard Law School.

Read the history of the attacks on marriage and the family, from the days of Karl Marx and Margaret Sanger to those now pushing for mandatory recognition of same-sex “marriage,” in “Takedown: From Communists to Progressives, How the Left has Sabotaged Family and Marriage.”

The earlier possible nominees:

  • Steven Colloton of Iowa is a judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, a position he has held since President George W. Bush appointed him in 2003. Judge Colloton has a résumé that also includes distinguished service as the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of Iowa, a Special Assistant to the Attorney General in the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel, and a lecturer of law at the University of Iowa. He received his law degree from Yale, and he clerked for Chief Justice William Rehnquist. Judge Colloton is an Iowa native.
  • Allison Eid of Colorado is an associate justice of the Colorado Supreme Court. Colorado Governor Bill Owens appointed her to the seat in 2006; she was later retained for a full term by the voters (with 75% of voters favoring retention). Prior to her judicial service, Justice Eid served as Colorado’s solicitor general and as a law professor at the University of Colorado. Justice Eid attended the University of Chicago Law School, and she clerked for Justice Clarence Thomas.
  • Raymond Gruender of Missouri has been a judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit since his 2004 appointment by President George W. Bush. Judge Gruender, who sits in St. Louis, Missouri, has extensive prosecutorial experience, culminating with his time as the U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Missouri. Judge Gruender received a law degree and an M.B.A. from Washington University in St. Louis.
  • Thomas Hardiman of Pennsylvania has been a judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit since 2007. Prior to serving as a circuit judge, he served as a judge of the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania since 2003. Before his judicial service, Judge Hardiman worked in private practice in Washington, D.C. and Pittsburgh. Judge Hardiman was the first in his family to attend college, graduating from Notre Dame.
  • Raymond Kethledge of Michigan has been a judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit since 2008. Before his judicial service, Judge Kethledge served as judiciary counsel to Michigan Senator Spencer Abraham, worked as a partner in two law firms, and worked as an in-house counsel for the Ford Motor Company. Judge Kethledge obtained his law degree from the University of Michigan and clerked for Justice Anthony Kennedy.
  • Joan Larsen of Michigan is an Associate Justice of the Michigan Supreme Court. Justice Larsen was a professor at the University of Michigan School of Law from 1998 until her appointment to the bench. In 2002, she temporarily left academia to work as an Assistant Attorney General in the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel. Justice Larsen received her law degree from Northwestern and clerked for Justice Antonin Scalia.
  • Thomas Lee of Utah has been an Associate Justice of the Utah Supreme Court since 2010. Beginning in 1997, he served on the faculty of Brigham Young University Law School, where he still teaches in an adjunct capacity. Justice Lee was Deputy Assistant Attorney General in the Justice Department’s Civil Division from 2004 to 2005. Justice Lee attended the University of Chicago Law School, and he clerked for Justice Clarence Thomas. Justice Lee is also the son of former U.S. Solicitor General Rex Lee and the brother of current U.S. Senator Mike Lee.
  • William Pryor Jr. of Alabama is a judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit. He has served on the court since 2004. Judge Pryor became the Alabama Attorney General in 1997 upon Jeff Sessions’s election to the U.S. Senate. Judge Pryor was then elected in his own right in 1998 and reelected in 2002. In 2013, Judge Pryor was confirmed to a term on the United States Sentencing Commission. Judge Pryor received his law degree from Tulane, and he clerked for Judge John Minor Wisdom of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.
  • David Stras of Minnesota has been an Associate Justice of the Minnesota Supreme Court since 2010. After his initial appointment, he was elected to a six-year term in 2012. Prior to his judicial service, Judge Stras worked as a legal academic at the University of Minnesota Law School. In his time there, he wrote extensively about the function and structure of the judiciary. Justice Stras received his law degree and an M.B.A. from the University of Kansas. He clerked for Justice Clarence Thomas.
  • Diane Sykes of Wisconsin has served as a judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit since 2004. Prior to her federal appointment, Judge Sykes had been a Justice of the Wisconsin Supreme Court since 1999 and a Wisconsin trial court judge of both civil and criminal matters before that. Judge Sykes received her law degree from Marquette.
  • Don Willett of Texas has been a Justice of the Texas Supreme Court since 2005. He was initially appointed by Governor Rick Perry and has been reelected by the voters twice. Prior to his judicial service, Judge Willett worked as a senior fellow at the Texas Public Policy Foundation, as an advisor in George W. Bush’s gubernatorial and presidential administrations, as Deputy Assistant Attorney General in the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Policy, and as a Deputy Attorney General under then-Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott. Justice Willett received his law degree and a master’s degree from Duke.

The Associated Press suggested Trump’s goal with the list is to “earn the trust of still-skeptical establishment Republicans who question his electability in the general election, as well as conservatives in his party still wary of his commitment to their cause.”

At Powerline blog, Paul Mirengoff wrote: “The list confirms what I have heard – that Trump’s talking to the right conservatives when it comes to the Supreme Court. It doesn’t guarantee a conservative nominee, but it does highlight what is probably the best argument, from a conservative perspective, for voting for Trump – his judicial nominations (and not just to the Supreme Court) are virtually sure to be vastly better than Hillary Clinton’s.”
Read more at

http://www.wnd.com/2016/09/trump-beefs-up-list-of-supreme-court-candidates/