Temple to Journalist’s Self–Regard Falls on Hard Times

Evidently, America just wasn’t that in to you.

The Newseum, a 250,000–square–foot Nexus of Narcissism for America’s journalists is in danger of closing. Originally opened 20 years ago, the Newseum is journalism’s valentine to itself. A museum designed to tell a breathless public everything it could possibly want to know about all that’s warm and wonderful about reporters.

That’s a tough sell when journalists are tied with lawyers in the public’s disdain ranking.

A better way to think of the Newseum is as a celebration of the interpreters of an event rather than the event itself.

I’m sure if historians were mentioned in the Constitution, that profession might have tried the same gambit. Fortunately we’ve been spared the “Histeum.”

The media, as it never tires of telling us, is mentioned in the Constitution and to prove it the Newseum has the First Amendment etched on the front of this Pennsylvania Avenue Preening Palace, but that’s only window dressing.

It would have been more fitting to simply install the world’s largest mirror so the Opposition Media could admire itself as members of the profession entered the building.

This tangible demonstration of the journalistic ego contains 250,000 square feet of exhibit space, PLUS 15 theaters, a conference center, parking garage, apartments AND a Wolfgang Puck restaurant.

For comparison purposes we have two other museums dedicated to the 2nd Amendment — also in the Constitution although journalists often pretend otherwise. The NRA National Firearms Museum in Fairfax, VA is only 15,000–square–feet and the J. M. Davis Arms Museum in Claremore, OK totals another 40,000–square–feet. This makes the combined total less than 20 percent of Battleship News.

The Newseum was originally founded in Arlington, VA but as far was the sophisticates who ran the place were concerned they may as well have been in Claremore. They longed for the bright lights. So in 2008 the facility moved to Pennsylvania Avenue between the White House and the Capitol.

Timing couldn’t have been worse. The Newseum greatly increased its expenses just when the journalism profession was beginning its long slow decline. A mausoleum would have made more sense.

Newseum marketers had as much trouble convincing tourists to visit as journalists had convincing those same Middle Americans to vote for Hillary. Adult tickets costing $24.95 didn’t help either. While the National Air and Space Museum had 7 million visitors in 2016 the Newseum had a mere 800,000, which according to the Washington Post, brought in $7.5 million in revenue.

Even hijacking captive audiences of school children on field trips, PR events trying to buy journo good will and industry confabs weren’t enough to cover the operating nut. To keep the Newseum from closing like a suburban newspaper, the Freedom Forum, formerly the Gannett Foundation, has been pumping approximately $20 million a year into the budget for a total of $500 million.

That’s a lot of money for a vanity project.

I’m a journalist myself and I never had any interest in visiting “my” museum.

In WaPost coverage of the Newseum’s problems mention is made of some of the more interesting exhibits, like the “interactive displays and exhibitions on 9/11, the FBI and the Unabomber, and the fall of the Berlin Wall. Newer exhibitions include one on the 50th anniversary of the civil rights movement and ‘First Dogs: American Presidents and Their Pets.’”

But the exhibits are all derivative. Journalists didn’t accomplish any of those events. They observed those events. Heck, they didn’t even clean up after the presidential dogs!

Visiting the Newseum and expecting a firsthand experience is like going to Wolfgang Puck’s restaurant and instead of being allowed to eat, they hand you a copy of the food critic’s review.

I’ve been trying to think about what would get me to visit and I came up with a list of journalistically–related exhibits that have real tourist interest:

  • An animatronic display with a copy editor — like Lincoln at Disneyland — explaing the proper usage of “fewer” versus “less” and why beer doesn’t need an ‘s’ to be plural
  • A small, tasteful display with the last vestige of CNN’s credibility
  • Brian William’s bullet–holed Katrina ballistic vest
  • Hillary’s 35,000 email messages
  • Katie Couric’s before and after facelift photos
  • The last offering envelope used by a major network anchor
  • And the biggest attraction of all: The Ark of Political Correctness

If the staff wants to adopt any of my ideas, they’re going to have to move fast. The Freedom Forum is getting ready to turn off the subsidy spigot. As Wayne Reynolds, a former Newseum board member put it, “Who would give them money when they were losing $30 million a year? People typically don’t want to salvage a sinking ship.”

Advertisements

Discovery of Trumpophobia Would Help Deplorables

(EDITOR’S NOTE: This was a singularly unpopular column. Only one of the subscribing news outlets of the Cagle Syndicate chose to run it. See if you can guess why.)

The last couple of weeks have been so stressful for Trump voters that conversion to Islam is looking increasingly attractive as a means of avoiding media scrutiny.

The fact is both Trumpistas and the Umma bear a certain similarity. Trump voters and Moslems both adhere to the instruction of man whose example, in at least some instances, is wildly out of sync with contemporary mores — even if specifics differ.

[Note on “Moslem.” Muslim is an Arabic word. I’m not an Arab so I use the English term Moslem. Do we call the Germans the Deutschen? Are the Hindus the Hindoos? Of course not. Enforcing Muslim instead of the perfectly good Moslem is another example of the cultural coddling extended to Islam that is found nowhere else and is the basis of this column.]

Take women for instance. Both had multiple wives, Mohammed simultaneously and Trump consecutively. In parts of the Islamic world the attraction of women is viewed as so powerful they are hidden in gunnysacks. Trump is in agreement, but he paraded women in bikinis down a runway.

Trump speculated regarding the results of groping women, while Islamic scholars have rules for beating women. Islam is plagued by female honor killings, while Trump’s tweets claim some females are dishonorable. And both groups must contend with fallout from the more zealous adherents.

In the Moslem case it’s jihadis and in the Deplorables case it’s Trump.

Yet the aftermath after major Religion of Peace incident is the complete opposite of the recriminations that ensue after a major Trump incident.

In Barcelona jihadis attacked a crowd of pedestrians with a rented van. The resulting toll was 15 dead and 120 wounded. This attack was actually the second of three that began with the explosion of a bomb manufacturing operation and ended with another vehicle attack that saw five jihadis shot dead.

In Charlottesville, VA there was only one event, a Nazi and bigots protest in favor of retaining statues of Civil War heroes who also happened to be slave owners. Counter protesters appeared on the scene and in the resulting violence a woman that was part of the mob protesting the protesters was killed by one of the bigots.

In Spain, even before the last jihadi was caught, the media herd feared a potential outbreak of “Islamophobia.” Yahoo News warned, “Muslims Fear Anti–Islam backlash in Tolerant Barcelona.” While area hospitals were still treating victims in critical condition, one Moslem woman griped, “In the end Muslims are the main victims, for the deaths as well as for the social pressure.”

And the media doesn’t contact a single one of the real victims for a word in response.

Here in the US not only is there no concern regarding an outbreak of Trumpophobia after an incident, the Opposition Media is handing out infected blankets.

It didn’t help that Trumps thumbs are no more articulate than his lips. A tweet that was supposed to condemn ALL the violence in Charlottesville doesn’t measure up to the OpMedia’s content standards. Trump is therefore accused of giving aid and comfort to Nazis and bigots.

Trump wasn’t even part of the Charlottesville march, but the OpMedia contends he bears responsibility because the bigots were white and presumably some were Trump voters.

Naturally this means all Trump supporters are equally guilty.

Corporate CEOs on Trump advisory boards smell the tar bubbling and they begin to resign in a huff. A pastor on a religious advisory board can’t stand to associate with a man who tweets so poorly and he resigns.

The trickle–down opprobrium continues.

There’s a rally in Boston a few days later and one of the signs reads, “White Silence Is Violence.” What are the chances of ever seeing a sign that reads, “Moslem Silence Is Violence”?

Lest someone get the idea there is a nexus between terrorism and Islam, the Washington Post assures readers there is no fallout in Barcelona businesses run by Moslems. A computer storeowner is immune to bombing backlash, as is a nearby grocery store owner. I’m sure customers would be happy to step over the debris to shop if it meant staving off an outbreak of the dreaded Islamophobia.

Meanwhile here in the US the CEO of Camping World has told customers who agree with Trump to shop somewhere else. The guilt by association even extends to pre–Charlottesville bumper stickers. A week ago my wife made the mistake of driving down the road in Virginia with a Trump/Pence sticker on her car.

A tolerant advocate of peace and love began honking at her and making obscene gestures before she cut my wife off.

While Spain is avoiding “a post attack culture war” the opposition media and the commentariat here appear to be doing their best to fan the flames. Trump voters who own a business should be bankrupted. Trump voters who own a checkbook should shop elsewhere. Trump voters who attend college should take a vow of silence.

I suppose the only hope for relief is for Trumpistas to convince the OpMedia there are “moderate Trump voters” worth cultivating. It worked for the mullahs in Iran, maybe it will work here.

Moral Instruction From the Opposition Media

How accurate is a poll based on a set of facts that don’t exist?

The WaPost’s Greg Sargent is excited about a new CNN poll claiming a vast majority of Americans essentially support open borders. But before we decide to delete the 4th of July from the calendar and add Cinco de Mayo, it’s crucial to know the entire question, so as to judge the accuracy of the result.

It reads:

Now, thinking about how the U.S. government should treat illegal immigrants who have been in this country for a number of years, hold a job, speak English and are willing to pay any back taxes that they owe.

Would you favor or oppose a bill that allowed those immigrants to stay in this country rather than being deported and eventually allow them to apply for U.S. citizenship?”

CNN may as well have asked respondents their view on the commercial viability of unicorn ranching. A more accurate question would have included the qualifier “and meet only one of the following four conditions.

An accurate question is both longer and more truthful:

Estimates of the number of illegal or undocumented immigrants currently living in the US range from 9 million to 19 million. One approach to dealing with those who have lived here a number of years is to offer amnesty or a path to citizenship. [Rotate description]. Supporters say it’s morally right that illegal or undocumented immigrants who have a job, speak English and are willing to pay back taxes should have the opportunity to become productive and legal. Opponents say the jobs illegal or undocumented immigrants hold are taken from citizens, bi–lingual ballots prove the requirement to speak English is not enforced now and depending on immigrants to admit to owing taxes is unrealistic and back taxes won’t be paid. [Rotate arguments]

Knowing this do you favor or oppose a bill that allowed those immigrants to stay in the country rather than be deported and eventually be offered amnesty or a path to citizenship?

That balanced question reflects reality and produces an answer that would merit news coverage and analysis, rather than the 90 percent approval CNN’s fantasy question got.

So what did the media make of these results and how were they wrong? You guessed it, click on the link below and go to my complete Newsmax column:

https://www.newsmax.com/MichaelShannon/bannon-california-cnn/2017/04/27/id/786847/

 

 

Trump Shows Beta Politicians How a News Conference Is Done

Another bedrock of conventional wisdom has been overturned. During the Trump administration it is okay to shoot the messenger.

Metaphorically speaking.

trump-meat-the-pressTrump finally held the news conference the media had been demanding and he gave it to them good and hard. Trump already holds the distinction of winning the greatest modern presidential debate — Round 2 with Hillary. Now news conference as president–elect set a record for entertainment and pugnacity that will be hard to top.

The big blowup came in connection with stories concerning slanderous sexual accusations that allegedly took place when Trump was in Moscow. Evidently Access Hollywood didn’t have this tape but the media hoped the FSB did.

It is an index of the contempt in which the media holds Trump that they could believe the charges were true. It takes an Anthony Weiner–sized intellect to think a man of Trump’s prominence could go to Moscow, hire hookers and not be videotaped by the Russian security service.

As much as it loved the story CNN didn’t have the tape, so the network did the next best thing and mentioned the existence of the slanderous charges and said US intelligence officials had a copy. This is sleazy signaling. Connecting the allegations with intelligence agencies gives a hint of veracity to viewers and fits nicely with the Putin–stole–the–election theme of the administration’s honeymoon period with the media.

Even worse, CNN’s mere mention gives other reporters cover when they use it. It’s the Pontius Pilate Gambit. CNN thinks it can’t be held responsible because they didn’t mention specifics.

The dean of CNN weasels, Wolf Blitzer, uses the technique frequently. I use a video in media training sessions where Blitzer quizzes former President Dick Cheney regarding the sexual preferences of one of his daughters. The question has nothing to do with any national issue, but MSM reporters love to discuss homosexuality with Republicans.

Cheney doesn’t dignify the question with an answer. He gives the furry Mustela a withering glare and says, “Wolf you’re out of line.”

Blitzer proceeds to wet his pants and whine “but people are saying.” Essentially the same excuse CNN is using now.

Trump not only won’t suffer fools gladly — he won’t suffer them at all.

He told the CNN reporter, “No, I’m not going to give you a question…You’re fake news.” The New York Times moaned the scene “stunned” journalists and “delegitimized” reporters while the LA Times said Trump broke “the norms of presidential engagement with the news media.”

These so–called norms are rules unilaterally written by the news media. The mainstream media (MSM) is accustomed to Republican presidents who are quickly domesticated. Since they are interlopers in an office the media believes rightly belongs to the left, MSM culture informs Republicans it’s “not presidential” to object to the tone or content of coverage.

So Trump is supposed to grin–and–Bush it.

This might have worked in the past when the media sold the public on the fiction they were high priests of propriety and impartial purveyors of fact. Now the public can see and judge for themselves events that in the past might have been unavailable. Even more important, a multiplicity of news outlets has given the information consumer a variety of opinion instead of the cultural Marxist groupthink that dominated news coverage until the rise of Fox and the Internet.

Journos who followed the lead of the New York Times media columnist and threw what passes for their objectivity to the wind when covering Trump are now reaping the whirlwind.

Journalists are the ex–wives or ex–husbands of public discourse. Pretentious Pharisees who believe they are somehow exempt from societal norms.

The public simply doesn’t adore the media the way the media adores itself. That’s why they lose confrontations with Trump. He acts exactly the way 75 percent of the fly–over public would act when some self–important jerk starts badgering them.

The other 25 percent would deck them.

The media is so full of themselves they don’t even recognize an insult. After Trump dispensed with the CNN heckler, he went to the next reporter who was with BBC. Trump commented that network was a “beauty,” lumping them in with CNN, but the reporter thought it was praise.

Trump isn’t going to play by the media’s rules. He’s not going to answer, “When did you stop beating your wife” questions and he’s not going to flatter their egos.

If you haven’t watched the entire news conference you should do so. You’ll enjoy what Fox News host Sean Hannity described as “the single greatest beatdown of the alt-left, abusively biased mainstream media in the history of the country.”

White Reporter Contends Dark–Skinned People Can’t Control Themselves

Samantha Sunne had an authentically gritty New York City experience during a recent visit. She “spent four hours curled in a ball, balancing on a narrow wooden bench…trying to avoid the freezing cinderblock walls and the cold cement floor, splattered with cigarette butts and rotten food.”

This is just the kind of first–hand experience writers used to crave, but Sunne is not too happy about her brush with the NYC justice system.

Maybe it’s because they refused her request for a gluten–free cell.

reagan-crime-sentencesSamantha doesn’t contend she was innocent — the Hillary defense — her contention is the offense is guilty.

Sunne writes in the Washington Post that in the wee hours she was riding the A–train and propped her feet up on the seat in front of her. The next thing she knew it was Eric Garner all over again.

Only Sunne was arrested by a woman, didn’t resist the arrest and, except for exposure to second–hand tobacco products, she was none the worse for wear. But that’s not how she sees it: “I became one more victim of ‘nuisance laws,’ regulations that criminalize small misbehaviors that don’t hurt anyone.”

The left characterizes these ordinances as “nuisance laws” when the statutes only inconvenience lawbreakers. A better term would be “respect your neighbor” laws, but leftists are completely unwilling to make any contribution to public order if doing so has even the slightest influence on their personal preference at that particular moment.

Instead Sunne takes a law designed to keep seats in the NY subway clean and ready for tired behinds and morphs it into yet another sinister plot to keep the black man down.

She explains, “On its face, this might not seem like a big deal — everyone wants clean subways and orderly cities. But criminalizing small acts can have major consequences for nonwhite and low-income people, who are disproportionately arrested and convicted for these infractions.”

How is Samantha’s viewpoint regarding the “nonwhite” population’s adherence to the law any different from that of the Klan? The Klan thinks “people of color” can’t control their sexual urges and Sunne evidently believes minorities lack the self–control necessary to resist the urge to break the law.

It’s just in their nature.

If you ask me Sunne and her fellow traveler’s mindset is the real bigotry. These laws aren’t designed to inflict discrimination on blacks or browns; they are designed to establish a baseline for public behavior.

Besides, even in the Post not everyone is in agreement that enduring a gritty nonchalance toward behavior norms is worth it because the resulting atmosphere makes visits to the big city so much more authentic for leftist tourists.

Natalie De Vincenzi writes, “We need security cameras on all Metro cars…[cameras] could hold accountable the teenagers who threw objects at me on the train.” Now I’m sure Samantha would object and saying throwing objects, as opposed to throwing curses, is assault and not a nuisance.

But that’s the big problem with disorder. It has a tendency to escalate.

Samantha’s delicate feet on the seat are quite a bit different from say Michael Brown’s. I’m sure Samantha would be happy to remove hers when the little old white lady asked, but I’m not sure grandma would even bother to ask Brown.

Public order laws are designed to protect the elderly, the infirm, the young, the female and the wimpy, while restraining the unruly. Politely asking the impolite to behave puts a burden on people that most are too timid to assume. That’s when the government acts.

“Nuisance” laws aren’t like Obamacare. Obamacare makes you buy health insurance or the government penalizes you. “Nuisance” laws don’t require you to polish seats on the subway with anything other than your behind.

Rather than acknowledging how much better city life has been since the implementation of the “Broken Windows” theory of policing, people like Sunne delight in attempting to reverse the major gains made in public safety over the past two decades, by attributing the progress to “flawed and unfair” police tactics.

And by flawed I mean racially–biased, for as patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel, racism is the first refuge for the leftist. What’s more, the critics offer no alternatives for replacing police tactics that have saved lives and rescued communities.

Instead these “journalists” are like Tom and Daisy Buchannan in The Great Gatsby, “…careless people, Tom and Daisy — they smashed up things and creatures and then retreated back into their money or their vast carelessness or whatever it was that kept them together, and let other people clean up the mess they had made.”

Can the Hair Be Convinced to Train Like the Tortoise?

Instead of trying to turn Donald Trump into Mitt Romney, I suggest the campaign junta stop trying to construct a Debatetron 5000 and instead get Trump to utilize the assets that won him the nomination: Humor, the ability to connect with an audience and a willingness to say what programmed politicians won’t.

robottrump_march_8He’s not trying to convince the New York Times subscriber base to vote for him. Trump is trying to persuade independent voters who aren’t obsessed with politics to support him and, equally important, go to the polls.

Thinks of it this way: Trump isn’t after the people who stay in his hotels. He’s after the people who built and work in his hotels. (Assuming they’re citizens.)

And speaking of the Times, they’ve found another group of anonymous Trump staffers who’re going to single–handedly whip him into shape for the next debate. The term used is “rigorously prepare.”

Good luck, I can’t see them making a silk tongue out of a rabble–rouser’s ear.

The campaign can’t make Trump what he isn’t. He’s not going to sit still for some memorize–the–Koran debate workout. Instead of trying to make him into Meryl Streep, accept the fact he’s John Wayne and try to find a role that fits the venue.

Trump debate preparation should be fun, if the junta expects his willing participation. The bulk of it can consist of him watching his favorite person — Donald Trump — in one of his favorite activities: Speaking to adoring crowds at rallies.

Explain to him that when Hillary talks about crime or a crime–related question comes up he should respond with an illegal alien crime sound bite and then play the rally footage. Ask him to repeat what he just heard. The next day rearrange the order of the topics and clips.

Instead of treating the debate like Masterpiece Theatre, treat it like a sitcom. Trump can be engaging and funny. Bring those sides out. One of the most memorable occasions in the Bush Vs Gore debates was when Albert the 1st invaded Bush’s personal space and George W. looked at the camera and made a face.

It connected with the audience and expressed what all normal viewers were thinking. Trump should do the same. The debate audiences don’t help him because they are so stodgy. Trump feeds on the energy of the crowd. (Hillary feeds, too, but more like what happens in The Strain.)

Absent a loud crowd, let him look at the camera — since he’s on a split screen anyway — and try some non–verbal communication. It’s a technique Hillary is constitutionally incapable of adopting (also the only known instance of Hillary obeying any type of constitution).

The next debate is where the media will really be looking to trip Trump and make him look callous or insensitive as he relates to the “Millennial–in–the–Street.” This is the “Town Hall” session that consists of a crowd of angry leftists moderated by two condescending leftists.

The debate commission will assemble probably the only people in America who know less about the Constitution, the federal governments’ role and how government functions than Trump does and invite them to ask inane questions.

These questions typically consist of two parts. The beginning where the “independent voter” looks at the camera and hopes mom remembered to set the DVR and the conclusion where the “independent” puts her vote up for auction and the candidates then compete to see who can spend more tax dollars on her behalf.

You never see a questioner ask how long it will take to deport all the illegal aliens. Instead they ask why the government hasn’t flown the rest of their family up from Bogotá.

It’s a hostile venue with a hostile audience and Trump will have to be better prepared.

Right now Trump supporters boast he won the first part of the debate, but being proud of winning the first 30 minutes of a 90–minute debate is like being proud of winning the flat stages of the Tour de France.

Hillary probably couldn’t have passed the test at doping control after the race, but she crossed the finish line first.

Tim Kaine: Catholic of Convenience

One surefire way to spot an election year is to check Tim Kaine’s closet. If he’s been rummaging around inside, looking for his clerical collar, someone is going to be voting in November. This time Kaine is being introduced to a new, nationwide electorate as the senator from Virginia joins Hillary Clinton on the Democrat ticket.

tim-kaine-catholic-protestKaine’s role in 2016 is an expansion of his usual Virginia performance as “designated Christian.” His nationwide rollout as the theological counterpoint to Hillary’s aggressively secular reputation generates unintentionally funny coverage. Kaine’s being a Christian and a Democrat is so novel, it’s newsworthy!

The media’s sympathetic coverage treats publicly announcing your belief in God is a disability that successful politicians work to overcome. That’s why a candidate caught with a church bulletin in his briefcase is geometrically more frightening to the Bernie Bros and the rest of the pagan Democrat base than Tim Kaine in a turban and a suspiciously bulky down jacket in August.

Independents are the real target for Kaine and that’s why he’s being introduced to them like he’s a man of the cloth. Already the Christian Science Monitor and National Public Radio have called him a “devout Catholic” and other publications talk about his “[balancing his] catholic faith with Democrat politics.”

Yet somehow over the years when Kaine’s faith is weighed in that balance it always tilts toward Democrat orthodoxy and Christian heresy.

The truth is Tim Kaine is a devout Catholic like Judas was a devout follower of Jesus.

Judas’ willing participation in one big death rent the curtain guarding the Holy of Holies, while Kaine’s equally willing participation in millions abortion deaths rends our social fabric today.

Kaine finesses the Bible and his Catholic church’s prohibition against abortion with the same shuffle that Mario Cuomo tried in the 70’s. Kaine claims to be “strongly opposed” to abortion, but according to the Monitor, “he describes these convictions as personal beliefs. In accord with the Supreme Court’s landmark Roe v. Wade ruling on abortion, he doesn’t think the government has the right to dictate such an intimate decision for women.”

What this means is for Kaine when it comes to deciding how he will respond to the life or death of the unborn a judicial robe trumps priestly vestments.

Kaine is both wrong and actively misleading the public. Deciding to become a vegan is a personal belief. Belief in the sanctity of innocent life is being obedient to the call of Christ. A person who sincerely personally opposes abortion doesn’t have a 100 percent voting record with the National Abortion Rights Action League and Planned Parenthood.

Kentucky County Clerk Kim Davis spent five days in jail defending the sanctity of marriage. Tim Kaine doesn’t have the courage to cast five votes to defend the sanctity of life.

There is nothing preventing Kaine from voting his conscience and opposing public funding for abortions. Or allowing Christian organizations to decide what medical procedures the company will cover, but Kaine’s votes are laid before the altar of abortion.

There is nothing preventing Kaine from joining thousands of other Catholics during the Right to Life March, yet the event somehow never makes it on his calendar.

The issues where Kaine does choose to highlight his flexible faith mark him as a Comintern Catholic who has adopted the Left’s “social justice” agenda. In Kaine’s view God needs to get with the program and move faster. Like ISIS, he wants to use the power of government inaugurate a paradise on earth, only without the public executions.

If men won’t change their hearts on their own Kaine, like Hillary, is happy to do it for them.

Marvin Olasky talks about college students functioning in an environment hostile to their belief when he says: “The milder form of surrender is to see the Bible as personally meaningful but irrelevant to public discussion. That’s also destructive to faith in Christ’s lordship.”

The same admonition applies to Kaine.

Kaine is a Catholic as long as it’s convenient. But faith always takes a seat in the back of the bus when it starts to interfere with his career as a Democrat professional politician. It’s time to tell Kaine he can’t have it both ways. If his faith isn’t strong enough to guide his voting record and his witness on issues that affect God’s kingdom, then he needs to leave his clerical collar in the closet and stop clinging to Jesus’ coattails.

NeverTrump Hosts Three Out of Four Debates

Traveling to Mexico City to meet one–on–one with the camarón chauvinist, President Enrique Peña Nieto, is nothing compared to the high–stakes negotiation facing Donald Trump today. The commissars on presidential debates have made their moderator selections and these hanging judges make Gonzalo Curiel look like a friend of the family.

walking-dead-liberal-mediaThe moderation panel is composed of four Democrats and one journalist. The Democrats include NBC anchor Lester Holt, CNN’s Anderson Cooper, ABC’s Martha Raddatz and CBS’ Elaine Quijano. Evidently four tokens were enough, because the last slot went to FOX News’ Chris Wallace.

Yet for some bizarre reason, Trump claims to be happy with the “journalists” and is ready to attend his three debates.

If only the commissars had made Khizr Khan one of the group, Trump might be roused to defend himself.

Enduring Holt for the first debate is a given. Trying to bounce him would be like going to Detroit to evict black renters instead of attending a black church.

The other debates are a different story. Trump can try the art of the deal to invoke moderator change, if he works at it. You can have all my thoughts on the matter by clicking on the Newsmax.com link below.

http://www.newsmax.com/MichaelShannon/debates-moderator-moderators/2016/09/06/id/746976/

 

Votes Are No Indication of Support When Media Is Counting

We have an instructive contrast between how the mainstream media treats a candidate whose positions it supports and how it treats a candidate whose positions it loathes.

MSM DonationsBoth of our candidates have remarkable similarities. They’re outsiders who parachuted into the political arena and have never previously held office. Both are scornful of the entrenched political elite and promise big changes if they’re elected.

And while the net worth of the candidates varies considerably, both rely on extensive free media coverage to increase their exposure while at the same time reducing the need for expensive media budgets.

Finally, both candidates prefer rallies and crowd–generating events to the traditional grind of going door–to–door to engage the public and mobilize support.

So wouldn’t an ideal test of political relevance and candidate support among the general public be the number of votes amassed on Election Day?

Well yes. And no.

If the election confirms the media’s pre–determined bias, then THE PEOPLE HAVE SPOKEN! If the election doesn’t go the media’s way, then who cares what a bunch of yahoos think?

Which brings us to DeRay Mckesson and Donald Trump.

But to learn more about our couple, you’re going to have to click on the link below to get the complete story.

http://www.newsmax.com/MichaelShannon/candidate-mainstream/2016/07/12/id/738312/

 

Obama Insults the Bereaved in Dallas

It takes a special kind of president to travel to Dallas, ostensibly to speak at a memorial service for five assassinated police officers, and instead deliver a Black Lives Matter convention speech. A president completely oblivious to the purpose of the occasion and what decency requires.

Obama delivered a speech the Daily Caller said was almost entirely his composition, so sympathizers can’t go to the default excuse and blame it on the staff.

Obama lights fuseThis was Obama letting Obama be Obama.

Less than half the speech can generously be attributed to honoring the officers who gave their lives.

The rest was an insulting travesty that combined Obama’s usual self–referential adulation (45 mentions of “I”) with his faculty lounge race–baiting and hectoring of a society that after almost eight years still doesn’t deserve him.

It was a slap in the face to every member of the Dallas police family when Obama made excuses for Black Lives Matter and included sympathetic references to Alton Sterling who was shot resisting arrest in Baton Rouge: “And I understand these protests — I see them…Sometimes they can be hijacked by an irresponsible few. Police can get hurt. Protesters can get hurt.

“…But even those who dislike the phrase “black lives matter,” surely, we should be able to hear the pain of Alton Sterling’s family.” Maybe later, but certainly not at the Dallas service.

There is no sentimental equivalence between the deaths of five police officers killed while protecting people expressing their dislike of cops and the death of a career criminal.

Obama justifies this bizarre show of mortuary equivalence by explaining that in addition to his criminal career, Alton was the black male answer to Paula Dean, “We should — when we hear a friend describe him by saying that, whatever he cooked, he cooked enough for everybody, that should sound familiar to us, that maybe he wasn’t so different than us. So that we can, yes, insist that his life matters.”

Yes, nothing says loving like something from the oven. If only Sterling expressed an equal love for the law.

Dallas cops gave their lives trying to keep the peace, Sterling lost his life running a low–class hustle where he sold pirated CDs and DVDs to a customer base that has as much respect for intellectual property as China.

Examined in the light of his overall criminal career, Sterling’s activities that night were almost benign, except for brandishing the gun at the person who called 9–1–1. The individual Obama eulogized on the Dallas stage was a convicted pedophile, domestic abuser, burglar and thief with previous gun convictions.

That’s enough to get you banned from the NFL, but if a cop shoots Sterling as he reaches for the illegal gun in his pocket, it rates a shout out from the president.

Hands down, I want to shoot!

The speech would’ve been a perfect time for Obama to point out it’s not only whites who fall prey to racial bigotry and that the nation as a whole would be better served if we resisted the urge to jump to conclusions before all the facts where known. And to give some credit, he did say painting all cops as criminals, serving a corrupt justice system, was wrong.

And then Obama turns around and gives Black Lives Matter, the group doing just that, absolution for the climate of cop hatred it created!

 

“We also know that centuries of racial discrimination, of slavery, and subjugation, and Jim Crow; they didn’t simply vanish with the law against segregation…So that if you’re black, you’re more likely to be pulled over or searched or arrested; more likely to get longer sentences; more likely to get the death penalty for the same crime…we cannot simply turn away and dismiss those in peaceful protest as troublemakers or paranoid.

“…To have your experience denied like that, dismissed by those in authority, dismissed perhaps even by your white friends and coworkers and fellow church members, again and again and again, it hurts. Surely we can see that, all of us.”

So maybe these Dallas cops were innocent, but keep an eye on the rest of those crackers.

During an occasion that called for truth Obama endorsed a racial shakedown movement based on the lie that Michael Brown was shot down in cold blood while on his way deliver cigars to orphans.

It was a travesty. It was offensive. And it was a disservice to the families of the slain police officers.

Black lies matter, Mr. President. If you don’t believe it, call the chief in Dallas.