Posts Tagged ‘media’

I have an answer…

July 26, 2013

…for Ruben Navarrette’s question on groups like La Raza:

Besides raising money, and putting on conferences, what are these groups good for?

Stirring up racial hatred and fostering balkanization, and that’s just a start.

Par for the course.

July 17, 2013

Rolling Stone is a shit magazine all-around, people. Surely I canot be the only one who isn’t the least bit surprised by their latest antic. They’re a bunch of raging leftists who try to portray themselves as edgy. I would almost have been surprised if they didn’t put a terrorist on the cover, let alone attempt to absolve the kid of any personal responsibility for his actions.

It’s as if, with apologies to Jonah Goldberg, “suddenly, all of these people and groups are stunned to discover that Rolling Stone is…Rolling Stone.”

And, on the flip side…

June 22, 2013

Why San Antonio’s newspaper is NOT so awesome:

Ex-reality TV star and house flipper Armando Montelongo Jr. did it. So did San Antonio Talons owner A. David Lynd, state District Judge Angus McGinty and newscaster Leslie Bohl.

When their marriages failed, they joined an array of other wealthy, famous and connected Bexar County residents or their spouses by filing for divorce using their initials rather than names in court filings to try to keep their breakups secret.

Disguising cases by using initials conflicts with a basic principle of America’s judicial system — that courts are open to the public. It doesn’t appear to comply with state court rules, either.

Why is this news? Why are the divorces of rich and famous people anyone’s business but the involved parties? Can anyone really blame them for wanting a little bit of privacy when it comes to such a sensitive issue? It strikes me that the Express-News is implying this sort of thing is the business of the public, and for the life of me I can’t figure out why.

And as I just told Sabra, to add insult to injury…

Go to for the rest of the story.

…not only do they give us this bit of not-news, they expect us to PAY FOR IT!

Wow, Blake Shelton sure is thin-skinned…

June 7, 2013

…if this is any indication. And more of his hypocrisy is on display here too, as he talks about the contestants on The Voice “just trying their best.” I am thinking of that Dave Grohl quote that’s been making the rounds on the Internet as of late:

“When I think about kids watching a TV show like American Idol or The Voice, then they think, ‘Oh, OK, that’s how you become a musician, you stand in line for eight fucking hours with 800 people at a convention center and… then you sing your heart out for someone and then they tell you it’s not fuckin’ good enough.’ Can you imagine?…It’s destroying the next generation of musicians! …Musicians should go to a yard sale and buy and old fucking drum set and get in their garage and just suck. And get their friends to come in and they’ll suck, too. And then they’ll fucking start playing and they’ll have the best time they’ve ever had in their lives and then all of a sudden they’ll become Nirvana. Because that’s exactly what happened with Nirvana. Just a bunch of guys that had some shitty old instruments and they got together and started playing some noisy-ass shit, and they became the biggest band in the world. That can happen again! You don’t need a fucking computer or the internet or The Voice or American Idol.”

Such puts Blake Shelton’s bitching and moaning in an entirely new light, doesn’t it?When you look at it from that perspective, Shelton and his fellow reality-show judges aren’t any better than the critics they deride in the end. And why would he care about what critics think anyway, let alone care enough to be an asshole on Twitter? Granted, I agree with most if not all of Guerra’s commentary on the Chron, but it’s never swayed my opinion one way on another on things like this that I don’t have the experience with to make an honest judgment for myself. I don’t know why Blake Shelton’s so damn insecure — other than the possibility that he doesn’t believe enough in what he’s doing to be confident it’ll live or die on its own merits.

I bet you will notice the same thing I did here.

April 23, 2013

So all these people are pissed off that the Express-News allegedly printed instructions on how to build a pressure-cooker bomb…

…yet not a single one of them is calling for common-sense regulation of the media. You know, for teh childrenses. A three-business-day waiting period. Because you know the E-N ran this in a fit of passion. Perhaps even a ban on running inflammatory material like this. After all, no one needs to know these things. They can just throw Molotov cocktails into the stands.

Hey, if that sort of thing is fine for the Second Amendment, surely it’s fine for the First, jawohl?

Another day, another error..

October 28, 2012

…in the San Antonio Express-News:


What’s the error, you ask? That is not an HEB Plus, that’s what. I drive by that store every day and have been in it more than once. The closest HEB Plus is at New Braunfels Avenue and IH-37, a little more than 3 miles away.

Those layers of fact-checkers come through again!

Layers and layers of fact-checkers!

October 27, 2012

From this morning’s San Antonio Express-News:

Texas 130 is a brand new, wide, divided highway, connecting south Austin to Seguin, and all the small towns and hamlets in between.

Ahem. Highway 130 runs from Seguin to Georgetown. Georgetown is north of Austin. Beyond that, building the road to run into IH-35 on the south side of Austin would have negated the entire point, which presumably was to relieve some of the unearthly congestion on IH-35 in Austin.

But remember! Official media outlets are better than blogs because they have fact-checkers! Or something.

They’re not even trying to hide it anymore.

July 24, 2012

E.J. Dionne, of the Washington Post, in the Houston Chronicle yesterday:

We’d all be safer, says the gun lobby, if every last one of us owned a gun.

Why is there so little pushback against assertions that are so transparently designed to prevent rather than promote dialogue? The answer lies in a profound timidity on the part of politicians in both parties. The Republicans are allied with the gun lobby and the Democrats are intimidated….

There are many reasons for this politics of timidity, not the least being a United States Senate that vastly overrepresents rural voters relative to suburban and urban voters. (The Electoral College overrepresents rural voters, too.) Add to this a Republican Party that will bow low before any anti-government argument that comes along, and a Democratic Party petrified of losing more rural support – and without any confidence that advocates of tougher gun laws will cast ballots on the basis of this issue.

So apparently, Dionne thinks we would be better off if urbanites could get away with basically telling the rural part of the electorate — in other words, the people who don’t have the luxury of having the police five minutes away — to go screw themselves. I guess that’s what you get when you live so long in the urban journalistic bubble like that, but he’d still quite deservedly be one of the first up against the wall when the balloon went up if we wanted to play by the rules by which Clinton played in Bosnia:

The war would certainly extend to those whose direct and support it– civilian or not– as they are primary targets…Bill Clinton extended our own rules of war in the Kosovo intervention to include the news media and other propagandists as legitimate targets.

No doubt Dionne doesn’t have a clue about that, or perhaps he is just whining, secure in the knowledge that as long as those rural interests keep those at bay who would do what he wanted, he can remain safe in his bubble.

As far as the “advocates of tougher gun laws cast(ing) ballots” goes, well, maybe they do cast ballots. But it seems to me to be pretty obvious that they’re outnumbered. I don’t know if the Brady Campaign vs. NRA membership would be an accurate indicator of anti-gunners vs. pro-gunners — it’s something like 28,000 for the Bradys vs. 4 million for the NRA — but if public polling is any indication, gun control is still at least as much of a loser at the polls as it was in 1994. And it’s probably more so, if Michael Bane’s musings on Gun Culture 2.0 are any indication.

And, of course, we haven’t even gotten to the at-very-best dubious constitutionality of gun bans. You will recall that when the Supreme Court handed down Heller v. District of Columbia, it ruled that arms “in common use” were protected by the Second Amendment. Considering the popularity of firearms like the Glock and AR-15, that protection would seem to extend to them. Of course it’s not as if progressives like Dionne give a damn about the Constitution anyway, so you might as well be talking to the moon by taking that tack with them.

But no matter. I don’t presume to say that there won’t ever be door-to-door gun confiscation, but the vigilance of gun owners has paid off quite a bit since 1994. And there’s no doubt the movement has been helped along quite a bit by events like 9/11 and Hurricane Katrina. So let them whine. The rest of us will deal with reality.

A snapshot…

July 23, 2012

…of what’s wrong with the media, in these two items from the New York Daily News.

The first one is just more of the old “NRA and American gun owners are to blame” bullshit and whining about bans on “assault weapons,” unconstitutional as they may be, and the “gun show loophole,” even though the killer got his weapons at a gun store — you know, the general tone that the Daily News is known for by those who read it.

The next item, though, ought to really burn your ass.

That one is the story of Jamie Rohrs and Patricia Legarreta, two of the survivors who are going to get married in the aftermath of the shooting. Everybody say it with me now, “Aww, how beautiful.”

That’s exactly what they wanted you to say, too. They didn’t want you to read that story and think about how that chickenshit Rohrs ran out of the theater to save his own sorry ass leaving  his girlfriend and two kids to die. Not a word about the guy who stayed there and saved their lives. (h/t JayG)

His name, by the way, is Jarell Brooks. Sounds like he’s the one whose name Patricia Legarreta should be taking, not the guy who ran out on her as the bullets were flying.

So what’s wrong with all this, you ask? The blaming of the inanimate objects and the glossing over of what has to be the ultimate act of cowardice, that’s what. Run out on your girlfriend and your kids as some madman is raining bullets, fire, or what-have-you down on them, have a come-to-Jesus moment, ask her to marry you and have the story run by an adoring media with the focus on your proposal, with no mention of the stranger who stayed behind and protected them. That’s a handy little template to follow for all the sackless wonders out there, if you think about it.

Whoa, can’t believe I missed this.

July 22, 2012

Looks like our buddy Dan Freedman at Hearst is back doing his PR for the ATF, and this particular release is a real doozy, too.

First of all, he — yet again — completely glosses over the fact that the ATF didn’t make any attempt to track the guns when they crossed the border.

And, of course, there’s the standard boilerplate about the ATF not having a permanent director and those poor, poor ATF agents being overworked and underfunded. No doubt Mr. Freedman never stopped to think about this particular approach backfiring, as there are those of us who might take the tack that ATF itself saw Fast and Furious as an opportunity to go to Congress and lobby for more funds, materiel, and manpower. Which, considering the ATF’s various and sundry documented abuses of power, in a way is almost as bad as the Obama administration hatching Gunwalker to gin up stats to justify more gun control.

Freedman also seems to be aghast that the NRA and Congress are always on its back. He apparently either doesn’t remember or give a damn about the Firearm Owners’ Protection Act of 1986, which was passed following a Senate report on ATF misconduct in a report four years earlier. Somebody has to be looking out for gun owners, because God knows the media won’t do it.

And as for this:

…some street agents feared they were enabling mayhem in Mexico and putting the lives of U.S. law enforcement personnel at risk.

These whistle-blower agents connected with gun-rights bloggers who saw Fast and Furious as an Obama conspiracy to promulgate greater gun restrictions.

Considering how mainstream outlets such as CNN/Fortune blamed Fast and Furious on lax gun laws and blamed the fact that it got any coverage at all on said “right-wing bloggers…trying to score points against the Obama administration,” could you really blame them? It’s not as if they had much of a choice. And it’s not as if the Old Media outlets have as much credibility as they did even a decade ago — because, after all, that was way before blogs, Jayson Blair and the Dan Rather document scandal.

And I’m really not seeing a problem with Codrea & Vanderboegh as sources here. Anyone who reads either of them knows they take shots at both the Democrats and Republicans, which is a hell of a lot more than can be said for the mainstream media.

(h/t David Codrea)