Tuesday, August 07, 2018

Is the President Giving the MSM a Bad Rap, When He Calls Them the “Enemy of the People”?

By Anonymous
Tuesday, August 7, 2018 at 2:12:00 A.M. EDT

CNN’s Jim Acosta says the President shouldn't call the Main Stream Media the "enemy of the people."

Here are a couple of examples of how they are the enemy of We the People.

When the MSM advocates for foreigners’ children (DACA) over the children of US citizens ... that's an enemy of the people.

When the MSM approves of criminal justice reform and letting prisoners out of jail early, while promoting gun control against law-abiding citizens, that's an enemy of the people.

When the MSM advocates for socialist candidates... that's an enemy of the people.

When the MSM advocates for never-ending immigration to the West from the Middle East... that's an enemy of the people.

When the MSM backs liberal candidates who have no problem with turning San Francisco and Los Angeles into 3rd world toilets, that's an enemy of people.

When it was revealed that Obama had secret meetings with the MSM and top newscasters from those outlets (Wolf Blitzer; etc.) to discuss the democratic narrative ... that's an enemy of the people.

When the MSM advocates for shutting down conservative speech on college campus, that's an enemy of the people.

When the MSM asks leading or softball questions to Obama and Hillary Clinton, but asks President Trump fake news questions ... that's an enemy of the people, Mr. Acosta.

Obviously, the list could go on and on.


Anonymous said...

Yes.Total agreement.They are the enemy of WHITE people no doubt about it.

Anonymous said...

One of The Enemies of Liberals Gets Removed
Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn., is calling on other tech companies to ban more sites like InfoWars, and says the survival of American democracy depends on it.

“Infowars is the tip of a giant iceberg of hate and lies that uses sites like Facebook and YouTube to tear our nation apart. These companies must do more than take down one website. The survival of our democracy depends on it,” Murphy tweeted Monday.

GRA:I was reading on ZH that "the Daily Storm" was removed as well.Murphy claims,"lies and hatred should not be allowed on our airwaves and Internet."
And Murphy will decide who's lying?He must think Samantha Bee,Colbert or Maher are prophets of truth and towncriers of facts.Or Lesta Holt(under the guise of news).
I can only imagine what the first week of a Dem presidency in 2020 would mean for "free speech".

--GR Anonymous

Anonymous said...

"discuss the democratic narrative"

Better to say the Democratic narrative?

Anonymous said...

"Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn., is calling on other tech companies to ban more sites like InfoWars, and says the survival of American democracy depends on it."

All persons on the left are experts as to what hate speech [whatever that is] and hate is.

I guess you can reasonably surmise when a Senator [a solon, a wise man] starts talking that way we are really in trouble.


If it walks and quacks like a duck. One important point-- who owns/controls all American media (TV/Hollywood/radio/advertising/publishing/the press/the Internet,etc) and the mechanisms (the law/judiciary) that give these media/forums legitimacy and a place of hegemony in our country/culture/polity? Who controls every word/image that we see and hear after it has passed through jewish filters? I guess that jews are the goy peoples' enemy. Why does this obvious point always go unstated/ignored?

David In TN said...

I've been meaning to write something on Lionel Lokos' 1967 book on the Media campaign against Goldwater in 1964. I'll try to do it in the next couple of days.

it's relevant to the subject of Fake News.

David In TN said...

Previously, I have written short reviews of two books by Lionel Lokos, House Divided: the life and legacy of Martin Luther King, and The New Racism: Reverse Discrimination in America.

A third book by this rediscovered writer is Hysteria 1964: The Fear Campaign Against Barry Goldwater, published in 1967. Lokos wrote: "In a period of ten months, Barry Goldwater was accused of being another Adolf Hitler, fomenting a racial holocaust, advocating a nuclear policy that would destroy half the world, seeking to destroy social security, being a lunatic, wrecking the Republican party, trying to subvert labor unions, paving the way for totalitarian government."

Lokos acknowledged Goldwater made tactical mistakes; denounced the War on Poverty in Appalachia, criticized social security in Florid, and attacked the TVA in Tennessee. And using the "extremism in the pursuit of liberty" line in his convention acceptance speech after defending himself from the charge of extremism for months.

Goldwater resembled Donald Trump in thinking out loud, saying too much, and making unforced errors.

Still, Lokos wrote "Admit all these things, but at the same time admit that the campaign against Goldwater reached a fever pitch of verbal barbarism and demagogic savagery unequaled in anything approaching a civilized society."

In July 1964, CBS News Correspondent Daniel Schorr, injected a total lie into the campaign. Schorr "reported" Goldwater was going to start his campaign in Bavaria speaking to a group of right-wing Germans in "Hitler's one-time stomping ground." Shorr added "The American and German right wings are linking up."

Schorr did "retract" it but in a mealy mouthed fashion.

Lokos gives chapters on reasoned speeches that didn't receive much press attention on:

The Nuclear Issue
The Social Security Issue
The Civil Rights Issue
The California Primary
A Diary of Defamation
A Post-Mortem

The highlight of the campaign was provided by Fact magazine, long out of business but I recall it being on magazine racks. The September issue had psychiatrists (names taken from the AMA) asked whether Barry Goldwater was "psychologically fit to be president of the United States?"

Most of the answers were anonymous. One was quoted: "I believe Goldwater is grossly psychotic." And it went on from there.

Goldwater later won a law suit against Fact magazine. Lionel Lokos concluded that Goldwater couldn't have won anyway, just a year after the JFK assassination. He felt it was "surprising" Goldwater got 39% of the vote considering the press and TV hostility. Another factor was the refusal of liberal Republicans to support Goldwater, who had backed THEM previously in various party capacities.

It was like the Never Trump cucks in 2016.

Lokos had one false note. He shared the belief of many conservatives of the time there was a "silent" conservative vote that doesn't go the polls but could be tapped. Our friend Countenance would tell you a candidate counting on the Silent Vote might as well start writing his concession speech.

Speaking of the Daniel Schorr lie, here ( is a 2010 piece on the subject at the time of Schorr's death at age 93. The NY Times and Washington Post obits mentioned the story as if it was "true."

Goldwater's liberal biographers Rick Perlstein and Robert Goldberg called the story "false" and a "smear."