Sharyl Attkisson has stepped on the dangerous 3rd rail.   As a consequence of discussing the liberal bias which she fled she’s exposing the corrupt leftist constructs of coordination to promote liberal propaganda.    Now the monolithic media machine is coming for her.

(Via GWP) […]  What stood out in Attkisson’s comments about Media Matters, made in an interview with Brian Stelter on CNN’s Reliable Sources that was broadcast on Sunday, was the revelation that Media Matters helps produce news reports for CBS News—and given the matter of fact way Attkisson mentioned it—presumably other liberal news outlets as well.
It is widely known that Media Matters ‘works the refs’ in media–trying to spin reporters to discredit conservative media, talk radio personalities and politicians and to report favorably on Democrats.
What has not been widely known until today was the Democratic Party front group’s role in actually producing the news. (more…)

This stuff cracks me up.    They know why his ratings have plummeted – NBC damn sure knows why.  The problem is – they have to build a 6 inch example file to get Gregory to believe it because it’s constitutionally impossible for him to accept it.    The more severe you allow your progressive ideology to visibly express, the smaller the audience willing to put up with it.  
Since Obama’s reelection David Gregory has gone “all in” with his insufferable Moonbat screeds.
NBC knows this, they have to – it’s ridiculously obvious because it happens all the time.  The pundits hang out in the liberal echo chamber drinking their Kool-Aid addicted selves to a state of gluttony.  At a certain point they forget its a ruse, actually begin to believe the bullshit they’re  selling, and start trying to get bigger prog-slobber party invites.  The Network Moonbats have yet to find a way to write a contract that says when your ideological DNA  gets infected you’re fired.
That’s when the slightly above lo-fo audience roll their eyes and says enough.   Soledad O’Brien, Piers Morgan, Keith Olberman, etcetera….. etcetera…..  etcetera…..
Huffington Post)  A new report from The Washington Post on Monday featured David Gregory discussing the “Meet the Press” ratings slide, and hinted at the kind of pressure the embattled host is facing.
The Post revealed that in 2013, the network hired a psychological consultant to interview Gregory’s wife and friends. “The idea, according to a network spokeswoman, Meghan Pianta, was ‘to get perspective and insight from people who know him best,'” the Post’s Paul Farhi reported. “But the research project struck some at NBC as odd, given that Gregory has been employed there for nearly 20 years.” (more…)

British celebrity-wannabe was interviewed about her decision to abort her child in order to improve her chances to appear on a reality show.
From the Daily Mirror: –  Wannabe celebrity Josie Cunningham last night confessed the chance of appearing on TV’s Big Brother was worth more than her unborn child’s life.
Puffing on a cigarette and rubbing her baby bump, the controversial model and call girl – who will have her abortion at a clinic this week – said: “I’m finally on the verge of becoming famous and I’m not going to ruin it now.

“An abortion will further my career. This time next year I won’t have a baby. Instead, I’ll be famous, driving a bright pink Range Rover and buying a big house. Nothing will get in my way.”

Last December during a town hall meeting hosted by Al Sharpton and the National Action Network in Chicago to address gun violence something unexpected happened.
The audience almost exploded into a revolt against: “Chicago Machine” politics, Mayor Rahm Emanuel and a black alderman in City Hall.   The surprise came with a panel and audience members calling to actually vote out their elected officials.
One 82-year-old preacher even called for “Tea Party” style meetings in some of Chicago’s south side communities such as Altgen Gardens and Trumbull Park. (via Breitbart)
[The last statement in the video is, well, um… just watch it]

Finally someone, actually Howard Kurtz, asks the question that many people want to know the answer to.

BACKSTORY – For those who might not have paid attention over the past two years, Sharyl Attkisson was doing some great investigative reporting on the DOJ, Eric Holder and Fast n Furious gun running scandal. Her reporting then shifted to look into what actions were taken by the DOJ *AFTER* the scandal broke, and the wagon circling around the White House began.
Then, in the fall and winter of 2012 and 2013 Sharyl began looking closely at the Benghazi fiasco.
In the midst of her investigative reporting (May 2013) a mysterious series of hacks began into her computers both at home and at work, in addition her phone was tracked and hacked.
CBS publically admitted in June of 2013 something nefarious was going on.   Sharyl reported after several weeks of looking at the issue she knew ‘what’ and/or ‘who’ was to blame.
Howard Kurtz asks what was the outcome of all of this ?

The case of the Kansas City Shooter provides an excellent example of Political Correctness running amuck.
The ideological left proclaim the religious/political ideology of Mohammed Whitaker is unknown because his birth name was Pedro Whitaker, and he is Hispanic.   They proclaim the fact he changed his name to Mohammed is not evidence of his conversion to Islam.

The fact that Pedro changes his name to Mohammed after some self-discovery event in his life is apparently something we are supposed to look upon with caution.   And we must absolutely not infer the fact he shot people in cars around Kansas City over the course of several weeks to label him as a danger.
But immediately Harry Reid knew some other guy, Clive Bundy, a rancher, was a “domestic terrorist”.

Gee, where have we heard this before.    The extensive full STORY is HERE and here’s an example of what types of consequences stem from this manipulative scheme:

[…]  And then there was 20-something Tiffany Jones from the South Side. (To protect the identity of her family, we have given her a pseudonym.)
In January, Jones got into an argument with a male relative that turned into a “serious physical fight,” according to the police report. Her sister later told police that she saw the enraged man punch Jones in the head. Police and paramedics arrived to find Jones’s siblings struggling to keep him out of the family’s apartment. (more…)

You walk into Obama’s Produce Store and you are met with a paradigm shift.

In ObamaMart no-one is allowed to use their individual determinations of value to afford their selections.

Prior to today you would browse the selections of fruits and vegetables picking them up, feeling them, looking closely and using all of your senses to determine what you would select.
You need some tomatoes for tonight’s salad, and you also need a few for making the sandwiches over the next three days.    Consequently you select two ripe tomatoes for today and two less ripe to use in the upcoming week.  They will ripen on your kitchen counter and present a differing value tomorrow and the next day.
Despite their equality in presentation, perhaps not all tomatoes are created equal; or at the very least today they do not present themselves of equal value to you.   There are other determinants, hence you evaluate each independently based on your need.
You selected bananas, apples, pears, peaches, plums and stone fruit in much the same way.
(more…)

“Disparate Impact” is a legal term used by progressive lawyers hell bent on social engineering.   The origin of the term actually comes from the EEOC (Equal Employment Opportunity Commission), and despite it’s application the interpretation of law makes no sense.
The intent of “Disparate Impact” is to engineer outcomes, not opportunity as one would think.
The term applies to consequences not origination or intent.
It was first thought up within a progressive think-tank as a way to force civil rights outcomes.  The concept was then delivered to the EEOC as a tool to leverage their social justice goal, force employers to hire illegal aliens.     It has been an open secret for well over a decade.
Example:   Under the legal definition of “Disparate Impact” you cannot use employment eligibility (work authorization) as a qualification for employment – Why?  Because more Hispanics, compared to other applicants, will be impacted as ineligible by the employment screening.   Ergo the employment eligibility screen itself, checking lawful residency, creates a “disparate impact” against Hispanics and is therefore illegal.
However, it was not the absurd nature of the legal application which upset the Federal Judge in this EEOC case;  it was the fact the EEOC itself uses the EXACT SAME pre-employment screening (credit check) it was suing a company for using. (more…)