Showing posts with label Newsweek. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Newsweek. Show all posts

Sunday, November 13, 2016

Sunday Morning News & Notes

Sphere: Related Content

Good morning all. Hopefully the Eagles can win today. Penn State had a nice win on a day with three major upsets.

Here's what is new:

Unfunny comedienne can dish it out, can't take it when it's given back, gives crowd the finger and walks off stage.



The Democratic Party is cratering all over the country. This does not bode well for them going forward.

George Takei has a split personality:


You may have seen the article about Hillary strolling in the woods contemplating her election loss when she happened upon a nice woman also out for a stroll with her kid. They portrayed it as Hillary being down to earth and mingling with the common folk but in fact it was a Democratic operative who works for her. She's so fake she has make shit up even when she doesn't have to.

When you actually make a sign that says "rape Melania" and then proudly hold it up at a rally, you've crossed the threshold of being the opposition into the realm of being un-human and your opinion no longer matters.

Several years ago, Newsweek was sold for the price of $1. I think that was way too much. Anyway, they pre-printed 125,000 special issues with Madam President on the cover in celebration of the anticipated Hillary Clinton win. They are now recalling them. I guess making business decisions like this are one of the reasons they were sold for less than the price of a pint of Bud Light.

Liberals are now eating their own. When you blame Oprah but not the shitty candidate you had you've lost your mind. No one has listened to anything Oprah said in years.

Donald Trump plans on fighting the media from the White House. Not sure how I feel about it since he's going to be really busy.

Monday, July 30, 2012

Romney, Obama and the Wimp Factor

Sphere: Related Content

Newsweek magazine (the magazine that was sold for a whopping $1) stayed true to their liberal form and released this cover:


This would be renowned failure Tina Brown's idea of how to get people to buy this irrelevant rag and generate some buzz. And buzz it did generate but it may not be the kind that Ms. Brown and her liberal friends anticipated. 

When one compares Romney to Obama and the comparison is on who is wimpier, the needle definitely points way more toward BHO than Mitt. Some cases in point:

Does a non-wimp sell out all his friends like Obama did to Bill Ayers, Rev. Wright or his own grandmother? Doe a real man allow a former president to take over a press conference and steal the show? Does a real man blame everyone else for their own failures and take no responsibility for anything? Does a real man allow a non-elected friend with zero national experience make all the important decisions for him? Should I continue? 

The man the $1 mag calls a "wimp" built a business, put on a world class event, amassed millions in a cut-throat business and has been through two hard fought primaries. 

Why I even acknowledge Newsweek I'll never know since they get roughly the traffic af this blog and are worth slightly less. 

Treach has more.



Wednesday, April 18, 2012

Has-Been Editor of Magazine That Sold for $1 Spews Venom

Sphere: Related Content

I never saw the "genius" of Tina Brown. I consider her an elitist only liked by elites and as liberal as pseudo-commie Katrina van den Heuvel. Brown ran several lame magazines that no one outside of London and the Upper West Side read and had fleeting success. She never adapted to the Internet age and it's left her a bitter old liberal hag. You know the type, a former somebody who all of sudden is just like one of us great unwashed.

Ask 50 people who Tina Brown is and I guarantee the response you get most is "Ginger on Gilligan's Island?"

Here we have the the nasty old bitch opining on the recently deceased Internet guru Andrew Breitbart:


During Hitler’s German, there were 50 foreign correspondents in Berlin, which is an incredible index of the golden era of journalism. What we have, of course, in the era of today with Andrew Breitbart – the blogger, the right-wing radical blogger who just recently dropped dead in the early 40s – was, of course, the absolute opposite. It’s really the degradation, in a sense, of the journalistic ideals of a William Shirer. It was the absolute opposite. Breitbart didn’t report anything. What Breitbart did, really, was he was a provocateur. He was a death by 1,000 tweets. He was, you know, quite happy to take the flying sound bite – any sound bite – and misapply it in its context and create an absolute mayhem for the person concerned like he did for poor Shirley Sherrod who was the obscure official in the Agriculture Department. He gave the impression by the cutting of her words in a tape that he released that she was giving racially motivated financing decisions when she was doing the opposite. So this was really a, kind of, bastardization through the format of Web and tweeting and simply using the Internet as a tool for activism.
Now this is a great example of a woman who lacked both the imagination and brains to see where journalism was headed. She still believes that dead tree media can survive with the right editor and the requisite liberal staff spilling lots of ink. The fact that Breitbart helped create the Drudge Report, the Huffington Post (which won a Pulitzer yesterday) and his own website empire escapes the simple-minded Brown.

Breitbart irritated the hell out of Brown because he was doing exactly what she wished her own people could do but was doing it from the right. He was a risk-taker and one who would embarrass those who deserved it. Breitbart would not only expose ACORN and Planned Parenthood but laugh as he did it and rub it right in the elitist face of people like Brown. Then he would hit the local watering hole and argue politics from a bar stool.

 You see, in Brown's inane mind, Breitbart wasn't a real journalist because he didn't report on evil Nazi's or go to a war zone as Shirer did. Perhaps I'm missing something but how many war zones did Tina Brown report from? She wrote trash on Princess Diana and made a career from her death.

 She now has a hand in the Daily Beast and I have to ask, how many people actually read that sorry website? think about the last time you clicked on the site while you were actually aware you were doing it. She now runs a 10-page rag that was sold to a liberal senators husband for $1.

 Now think how many times you clicked on Breitbart.

 This is nothing but the bullshit drivel of a washed up old hag who can't handle the fact that she repeatedly got her elitist ass kicked by Breitbart and only upon his death has the balls to attack him.

 In my world we call a person like that a pussy.

Tuesday, February 23, 2010

Climate Change Debunked Everywhere But Newsweek

Sphere: Related Content

Newsweek magazine was forced to retract a 1975 article in which they did a whole issue on global cooling and the world havoc that would result from it. This from a magazine that published a false story about flushing a Koran down a toilet that led directly to deaths.

With the rest of the world seeing clearly that global warming "science" is widely skewed and realizing that they've spent billions of dollars that could have been better spent on helping their own citizens, Newsweek remains firmly in the global warming cocoon.

Walter Mead explains, in-depth, how the last gasps of the global warming swindle remain but largely how the myth has been debunked so easily and quickly. It's been a tough few months for our green brothers and sisters as it's finally dawned on them that they've been had. They bought into a cult that was designed for nothing more than enriching people like Al Gore and redistributing money from wealthy nations to poor ones.

But not Newsweek. No, when presented with facts that show the "science" was a scam, they hold their collective hands over their ears and utter passages from An Inconvenient Truth really loudly. They are bitter and are taking out their ire on one man who was a loud sceptic from the beginning. In what can only be labeled a rant from a whiny teenager, Sharon Begley goes off on Lomborg without facts, reason or thinking that could even be considered rational.

This is the last gasp of a dying religion and one can only be thankful that it will be relegated to the dustbin of history with other false pseudo-religions like communism and Nazism.

Exit question: Does Begley look exactly like the smug, rebuked global warming supporter you thought?

Tuesday, March 10, 2009

Tuesday Afternoon News and Notes

Sphere: Related Content

Happy Tuesday.

Here's what's new in the solar system:

Howard Fineman almost criticizes Obama. He's still on his knees but is realizing that The One may not be the one.

The San Francisco Examiner shows how to really criticize a president. Perhaps the aforementioned Fineman should take notes. You know the BHO administration is a mess when a Frisco paper belittles him.

Pelosi abuses her office and the Air Force by using AF planes as her own personal shuttle. I wonder what her carbon footprint is and I wonder how much the Air Force personnel enjoy having the Diva of Dc aboard so often.

The Chinese Navy is getting chippy. Perhaps it's time to show them who the big fish in the sea still is. I think sneaking an SSN in and pinging the hell out of them would suffice. Hell, they did it to us.

How's that "smart diplomacy" thing Obama promised working out? Not so well. My new favorite mistake is Shrillary claiming that America is an older democracy than anything in Europe. Amateur hour continues.

New Aussie alcohol guidelines explained.

You may recall when Israel launched a raid on Syria back in 2007. It didn't get much play at first because neither the Israeli's nor the Assad said anything about it. Some picked up on it and we eventually heard it was a nuke facility. Here's the rest of the story thus far and a must-read.

Thursday, October 09, 2008

The Liberal Media is So Ignorant of Weapons

Sphere: Related Content

So Newsweek takes a circa 2002 picture of Sarah Palin holding a shotgun and puts it on the cover. In the pantheon of Newsweek bias, this hardly registers a blip. A woman holding a gun? Gasp!

Whatever.

Anyway, here's the picture and it's fairly innocuous to Americans not living in New York, Boston, San Francisco or LA:



So the LA Times blog posts about it on the awards insider page of all things. Here's the post:

How did Newsweek convince Gov. Sarah Palin to pose with a rifle for its cover?

Simple. It didn't.

Instead, it used an archive (fancy speak for old) stock photo of her taken back in June 2002 and used it for the cover without her knowledge.

However, to the magazine's credit, it did not try to hide the fact that it's a stock photo, even printing circa 2002 on the cover and again referencing the date in editor Jon Meacham's letter entitled "The Palin Problem."
So that makes it OK.

Right? Or maybe not? What do you think?

Hey, is that even the right way to hold a rifle? Can't you shoot your foot off like that?

Just wondering.
And we now see why the media is always wrong on the gun issue. As many commenter's explained in nice and not so nice terms: it's not a rifle, it's a shot gun. And yes, that is a proper way to hold a shotgun that is broken at the breach and also unloaded.

How can one be so uninformed about a subject of which they write? That was rhetorical of course.