******EXAMPLE NUMBER ONE******At MSNBC, The Morning Joe crew mocsk Romney for something that never happened but HEY! It's news even if WE created the news, right?
The morning crew plays a tape of a Romney/Ryan rally in which the banner claims Romney forced the crowd to say HIS name instead of Ryan's, as if he is an egotistical narcissistic casual bastard like certain other politicians with whom we are familiar.
I listened to the tapes, both cSpan and MSNBC/aka NBC News over at The Blaze and easily detected that the MSNBC/aka NBC News tape had been doctored. You can also hear the "ey" part of Romney's name but you can also hear either a boost or audio voiceover.
The video of Scarborough and his blonde hostette face palming in "embarrassment" over how stupid Romney is is so sickening it's difficult to watch without throwing up in your mouth.
The Blaze takes apart the incident, claiming (easily) that MSNBC/aka NBC News is caught in yet another doctoring scandal.
In fact, it's so easily transparent that it's difficult to watch. Several people, including a Black caller to Rush named Timmy, witnessed the event and said it simply was NOT true nor did it happen the way MSNBC/aka NBC News claims in their
******EXAMPLE NUMBER TWO******Example number 2 is, again, MSNBC/akaNBC News, this time where "newscasters" claim that the MSM hasn't been covering the presidential race very well.
Now you don't have to tell US out here that that's true, but that's not what Andrea Mitchell and gack Rachel Maddow mean to say.
What they mean to say is that Romney's too stupid to be a president of foreign policy (because the foreign policy we have now is working so well) and he probably doesn't even know that "war makes more veterans." (That's an actual Maddow quote.)
Mitchell and Maddow lament the lack of substance in this race and then immediately launch into the Brown/Warren Massachusetts race, which I've been following with great interest, Professor Jacobsen being a favorite legal blogger and ferocious Warren critic.
M & M's complaint is that they can't understand why Brown is criticizing Warren for lying about being Native American and benefited from claiming "minority" status in both college admission and hiring. Warren immediately removed her minority claim once hired and acted as if it never happened or was inconsequential.
M & M can't seem to understand that dishonesty, deceit and abusing a program meant to benefit the disadvantaged would bear relevance to character in a sitting senator, even one who's replacing Teddy Waitress Sandwich Kennedy.
Nor are M & M interested in the fact that Warren has been practicing law without a license, a small detail when it comes to representing companies or even in the government in front of the Supreme Court.
That detail would only be relevant if in the character of someone whose title bears an "R."
******EXAMPLE NUMBER 3******Example number 3 appears in a CBS video of 3 Ohioans who simply cannot find their way into voting for Romney. Naturally 2 of the 3 are "leaning" Obama (why be TOO obvious, after all?) while the "Republican" is unhappy that Romney is "too conservative."
Will we learn later the "Republican" is again actually a Democrat operative?
Obviously this is part of the psy ops campaign run by the Left (Democrats and media) to persuade the impressionable that an Obama win is inevitable.
******EXAMPLE NUMBER 4******Our last example is found with the polls in which the media creates the news and releases that news to the echo chamber of Leftist media outlets, who then cite the echo chamber as further proof that the created news is real.
This is not a new technique for the Left; Christina Hoff Sommers exposed this feminist tactic in Who Stole Feminism? when a college women's organization conducted a "study" which "proved" that women are beaten on Superbowl Sunday and then locked the study away refusing to let anyone look at it or observe the criteria upon which they based their findings.
Yet this study was (and still is) cited year after year as proof of abuse and how mean men are; millions of dollars were funneled into "crisis" centers, where their records were doctored to appear to verify the study.
Sort of a Piltdown Man hoax.
Or maybe a "oh, but I made a copy of the original before it got lost" Peking Man who only a few people saw.
******EXAMPLE NUMBER 5*******In keeping with the "all the news that's fit to create" philosophy of today's corrupt media, DaTechGuy's blog has another excellent analysis of the use of polls to shape public opinion, including Gallup's dismissal of the theory that polling more Leftists than Conservatives influences the outcome of the polls.
Included in his analysis is the echo chamber theory. Gallup, an organization which has been sued by the Obama Department of Justice, airily waves away concerns about imbalance:
Now if a given poll in Ohio in this election shows Obama with a 10-percentage-point lead, one should just ask, “How likely is it that Obama would be ahead by 10 points if he won by five points in 2008?” — forgetting party identification, which we assume is going to be higher for the Democratic Party if Obama is ahead, anyway.Um.
So I guess that means Gallup will continue to ask more Democrats who they're going to vote for because of the 2008 election but that "party identification" isn't important because, um, more people are voting for Democrats anyway, as evidenced by their imbalanced polls.
So let me get this straight.
You ask more Leftists who they're voting for then cite the fact that everyone you asked is voting Left as proof that everyone's voting Left.
So there you have it.
A corrupt, nearly dead Press Corpse flailing against the reality that they've descended to such stupidity that one can only laugh at them rather than take anything they disclose as serious news.
They're dying and they have no one to blame but themselves.
So take your brainwashed screaming Mimis with you on the way into the crypt.
You can call each other on your free government issued cell phones.