And some still wonder why more and more people don’t trust the MSM (UPDATE: APRIL FOOLS!)

MediaThe mainstream media’s bias in favor of Barack Obama has been well-documented. In 2008, Investors Business Daily posted a comparison chart of media campaign contributions to Democrats versus their campaign contributions to Republicans, and found that Democrats had a 100 to 1 advantage in that department. Over the last several years, some liberal journalists and columnists have bravely gone on the record in admitting the strong left wing tilt of most major (and minor) mainstream media news organizations.

Still, that hasn’t kept some folks -mostly on the left – from suggesting that the media is “just doing its job.” And, funnier still, a percentage of those lefties actually believe the mainstream media is conservatively biased. After you get done laughing at that one, make sure you forward the below recent examples of liberal media bias – painstakingly chronicled by the dedicated folks at the Media Research Center – to any liberal friend you have who still tries to suggest that the media isn’t biased in favor of Democrats. From their Notable Quotables:

Co-host Meredith Vieira: “Now Senator DeMint, as House Speaker Nancy Pelosi was walking into the Capitol, I noticed one of the Tea Party protesters was brandishing a broom in her direction. Was he calling the Speaker a witch? And by-”

Sen. Jim DeMint: “Oh, c’mon Meredith. I saw that protester, too. He was chanting ‘Sweep the bums out!’”

Vieira: “-and, and no Senator, as I was going to say, by implication aren’t the protesters implying that they want to burn Nancy Pelosi at the stake? Like they did at the Salem Witch Trials? And if so, will you, sir, condemn this kind of atrocious language? And if this happens again, will you have these protesters arrested?”
— NBC Today show, April 1.


“Now, as many of you know, the health care debate turned ugly when too many citizens still not over how African-Americans earned equal rights in this country set their sites on denying all of us access to health care. Now, in what some see as another ugly turn, those same so-called ‘Tea Party’ activists have turned their sites on President Obama’s noble dream of providing a free college education to all. So, Jake, should we fear more protesters swarming the streets of D.C., yelling racial slurs and gay epithets, trying, once again, to slow social progress?”
— Anchor Diane Sawyer to White House correspondent Jake Tapper, ABC’s World News, April 1.


“You know, Keith, I really think Barack Obama could finish the year with not just one Nobel Prize, but three. This health care bill is bound to save literally millions of lives, and the legislative language itself is a masterpiece. Given the good sense of the Norwegians, I think the President could easily win the Nobels for medicine and literature this year.”
— Newsweek’s Howard Fineman to MSNBC’s Keith Olbermann during live coverage of the health care bill signing, April 1.

Insane, isn’t it? Especially insane (and infuriating) is how the MSM ignored routine instances of visceral left wing hatred demonstrated (literally, in many cases) towards President Bush (let’s not forget the death threats) and conservatives on an almost hourly basis during the 8 years Bush was President, far more than the few scattered instances seen in the last year and a half of the Obama administration demonstrated by right wingers. In fact, the MSM still ignores left hatred towards the right to this day.

Anyway, make sure to read the whole thing.

Update – 8:20 PM: I’ve not fallen for a single April Fool’s joke all day – until now, apparently. The above MRC quotes were apparently an Apri Fool’s Day joke. But, they’re so used to what we’ve seen come from the MSM so many times before, that they were easy enough to fall for. They seemed so real …

Thanks to the multiple readers who alerted me to the joke. :">

President Obama to visit Charlotte tomorrow – local Tea Parties plan greeting

Via the Charlotte Observer:

Tea party groups from around the Piedmont are planning to protest President Barack Obama’s health care overhaul and other policies Friday, though details of the presidential visit remained sketchy Wednesday.

Tea party organizers said they expect protesters from as far as Asheville to descend on southwest Charlotte, near the Celgard plant the president plans to tour.

Celgard has been among the most prominent examples of the green-energy jobs that Charlotte’s economic development leaders hope to expand. The company makes porous membranes for rechargeable lithium-ion batteries used in notebook computers, digital cameras and other devices.

Obama is scheduled to make a midday visit to the plant, which he’s expected to tour before he speaks about the economy.

Details of Obama’s appearance, including the format, were unavailable Wednesday. Company officials referred reporters to the White House. So did city officials.

A spokesman for the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police Department said motorists could expect traffic delays and even stoppages in south and west Charlotte during business hours.

How much the trip will cost the city is unclear. The police department alone plans to spend up to $70,000 to staff it.


Protesters announced their plans on Facebook.

They plan to gather on South Tryon Street at Carowinds Boulevard. Craig Nannini, a tea party organizer, urged protesters to remain peaceful.

“Remember, even if youvehemently disagree with President Obama, respect theoffice,” he wrote. “Bring respectful signs (hand carry the signs, no sticks), and if counter-protesters come, be respectful and civil to your fellow Americans, even if they are not. We need the story to be about the message, not anything else, so everyone be on your best behavior.”

Since Congress passed the health care law this month, there have been reported threats on both sides. Michael Kelly, president of the tea party group We The People NC, said the protests will be civil.

“We expect the opposition to protest and try to incite violence,” he said, “and we intend to remain peaceful about it.”

For more details on where the Tea Parties plan to meet up tomorrow for Obama’s visit, click here.

Oh, and um, Mr. President – about that North Carolina unemployment rate

Study: War on soda via taxing it doesn’t stop obesity

The Associated Press reports that a new study on how taxing sodas impacts obesity finds that it’s had little to no effect:

ATLANTA — Small taxes on soda do little to reduce soft drink consumption or prevent childhood obesity, but larger levies probably would, according to new research.

The study is being released as a recent wave of proposals would raise soda taxes or create new ones on sugared beverages. But they’ll have to be a lot steeper than current taxes, which are generally 4 percent or less, said Roland Sturm, lead author of the new research.

“Small taxes will not prevent obesity,” said Sturm, a senior economist at the Rand Corp. in Santa Monica, Calif.

Sturm and his colleagues used information from a 2004 national survey of about 7,300 fifth-graders. The researchers looked at how the children’s height and weight had changed over the previous two years and how often the kids said they drank soda and sports drinks. The researchers also reviewed taxes on carbonated drinks that were in effect in 2004.

Roughly two-thirds of the children lived in states that had a tax on soda greater than on other food items. The highest was 7 cents tax on each dollar’s worth of soda. The average was about 4 cents.

They found the taxes made no real difference on overall soda consumption or on obesity for kids overall. They did have a small effect on certain children — especially those from families with an annual income of $25,000 or less. Those kids — who drank about seven cans of soda a week, on average — drank one less can because of the taxes, Sturm said.

However, if the taxes were more like 18 cents on the dollar, Sturm calculated it would make a significant difference.

And he’s not the only one arguing that:

Most of the taxes tend to be enough to bring in some extra money for struggling state budgets, but small enough not to rile soda manufacturers or significantly change buying habits, said Kelly Brownell, director of Yale University’s Rudd Center for Food Policy and Obesity.

“Taxes have to be large enough to affect consumption,” said Brownell, who has called for a tax as high as 12 percent.

At last, a voice of sanity – from that same piece:

The Rand study confirms that small taxes on soda don’t reduce obesity, and offers no evidence that larger taxes would do any better, said Christopher Gindlesperger, spokesman for beverage association.

“Taxes don’t work. What does work is balancing the diet and exercise,” he said.

Imagine that. But no, instead we have to tax to death (or ban) every food/drink that supposedly “hurts” us, because apparently it’s the government’s job to save us from ourselves. What’s next? A 25% tax on a Big Mac?

And isn’t it interesting that these taxes are oftentimes used to make up for “shortfalls” in the budgets of various state governments? In other words, most of the states who implement these tax increases are depending on you to keep on drinking that soda and/or smoking that cigarette so they can bring more much-needed tax $$. In fact, taxes on cigarettes (which are just about to go way up in SC) and other tobacco-related products are, in part, how SCHIP is funded.

You really can’t make this stuff up.