advertisement

The world-famous Internet site of the Nationally Syndicated Neal Boortz Show!

Search Boortz.com
Enter search terms:
Browse Boortz.com
Today's Nuze

"Every government interference in the economy consists of giving an unearned benefit, extorted by force, to some men at the expense of others."

Ayn Rand

Nobody's listening.

NOTHING BUT A BUNCH OF OBAMA CHEERLEADERS

By
Neal Boortz
@ May 13, 2009 8:32 AM
Permalink | Comments (40) | TrackBacks (0)

The Media Research Center did an analysis of the lamestream media's coverage of Obama's first 100 days. Guess what? Turns out that they have done a great job of sending tingles up their legs but a lousy job acting as watchdogs.

MRC analysts looked at all 982 broadcast evening news stories about Obama and his administration from Inauguration Day (January 20) through April 29. Here are some of the interesting, though not surprising, things that they found:

- Obama's first 100 days were defined by massive spending, aggressive intervention in the private sector and proposals for a huge expansion of the federal government. Yet none of the networks aired a single story on whether Obama's policies were pushing the U.S. toward socialism, and no reporter used the term "socialist" to describe Obama.

- Not only that, network reporters never used the word "liberal" to describe either Barack Obama or his agenda during the first 100 days.

- The networks lavished good press on every major initiative of the early Obama administration, including the massive stimulus package, all of the various bailouts, health care, stem cells, the environment and foreign policy.

- In the days before the President unveiled his unprecedented $3.5 trillion budget -- with a record-shattering $1.75 trillion deficit -- four out of five statements on the evening newscasts parroted the White House spin that Obama was a deficit fighter.

- Reporters treated Obama's hugely expensive $787 billion stimulus bill to mainly positive coverage (58 percent positive, 42 percent negative).

- The networks applauded Obama's decision to use taxpayer money to fund embryo-destroying stem cell research (82% positive coverage).

- Network coverage of Obama's mortgage bailout was also positive -- 59% of statements supported the bailout or wanted even more intervention, compared to 41% who opposed the bailout as unfair to responsible homeowners.

- Reporters heavily skewed their coverage in favor of the President's actions on global warming (78% positive).

- President Obama's decision to send thousands of additional troops to Afghanistan was greeted by nearly unanimous (91%) positive coverage -- a far cry from the highly negative coverage of President Bush's successful troop surge in Iraq two years ago.

- Like Obama and the Democrats, the networks went on a feeding frenzy against big corporate bonuses. The networks aired six times more statements forwarding the "infuriated" reaction to business (104) than criticized politicians' grandstanding (16).

- The networks spent days decrying AIG's $165 million bonuses, but hardly mentioned the $210 million in bonuses handed out by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac (the bailed-out mortgage giants with strong Democratic ties). ABC and NBC completely ignored the Fannie and Freddie bonuses, while the CBS Evening News gave it 27 seconds.

They made him. They must support him.



0 TrackBacks

Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: NOTHING BUT A BUNCH OF OBAMA CHEERLEADERS.

TrackBack URL for this entry: http://boortz.com/blogging/mt-tb.cgi/30769

Jamie Dupree's Blog

If you enjoy Neal's daily chat with Jamie Dupree, you'll love Jamie's Blog! Check it out for analysis of the campaigns and goings on in Washington D.C.

Cristina Gonzalez and Laura Nunemaker assist in the daily preparation of Nealz Nuze!


Avg. rating: N/A

What others are saying

  • Ivan
    What do you mean when you say that the federal reserve has 9-billion dollars of off the book money? How do you know this? And who are these supposed Oligarchs that are trying to liquidate our country? I'm not attacking your comments, I'm just curious as to what you're talking about. Thanks.
  • SHOCKINH NEWS
    This just in, conservative-biased organizations are surprised that news networks other than Fox aren't constantly using partisan conservative rhetoric.

    More shocking discoveries at 11.
  • I'm not arguing with you Todd
    I think you are not hearing all I am trying (maybe badly) to say.

    Anyone can report facts. But when I see the reporter put a snear on his/her face, that to me is spin. Sure they both do it, but he left has been doing it a lot longer so they are MAYBE a bit more subtle about it. Until you catch it a few times and start looking closer.

    You seemed to take issue with the story, and I thought you might want to go look at the data to see if you could find where they were wrong.

    For myself, I've lived too long to listen to folks I know I'll know like how they report the news. And frankly we haven't had any REAL objective reporters for... oh crap I can't remember the last one! Can you?
  • and again Joyce....
    it is perception. There is nothing "factual" about how someone perceives anothers intentions. It is a subjective analysis. You say you don't need the data because you "know what you see". That's fine but if someone else sees what they think is accurate reporting does that mean they are wrong? Media Matters gives quoted and recorded examples on a daily basis of what they call conservative media misinformation. I would be willing to bet you question their motives and outcomes even though they are just as "factually" correct as MSRC on any particular subject. That's because everything has a context and your views play into it. Let's assume for a second that Obama came out and made a statement that said "The IRS is out of hand and we need to reduce taxes, not increase them" and then the press stated that he made a bold statement. In that scenario do you think the MSRC would call that bias or shilling? OF course not because their bias would be to agree with what Obama said on taxes and therefore not disagree with the reporting. On the other hand if Obama said "Taxes need to be doubled"and the press called it a bold statment MSRC would be all over it as bias. That's because the MSRC is a biased organization themselves. Just as biased as Media Matters, only on the other side of the spectrum. When is the last time MSRC came down on any of the traditional conservative media for ther bias? They don't because they generally agree with it. I'm not saying it is right or wrong to listen to these "watchdog" groups. I am just saying they are as biased as those they profuse to be watching. Mike Huckabee was a favorite of Fox with tons of positive press. Now Mike Huckabee is on Fox with his own show. Have we heard MSRC say anything about the coverage Huckabee got and how now low and behold he is a paid employee? Of course not. If Bill CLinton got a show on MSNBC after the verbal stroking he got from them for years you can bet MSRC would be all over it. Instead Media Matters is all over Fox for hiring Huckabee and wouldn't say a word about Clinton to MSNBC. Tit for tat.
  • Jokes I would have told in place of Wanda Sykes
    “Biden was too scared to attend because of the swine flu, but then he realized muslims don’t eat pork.”

    “Michelle should be the new spokesman for Arm and Hammer baking soda. Her arms are huge. I just hope she can keep Barry from snorting the stuff.”

    “I can never figure out which of the Obama girls is Tootie!”

    Obama… must.. be… praised.
    Sycophants… must.. be… defended.
    Opponents..must..be…destroyed.

    Those are the marching orders of the Lamestream Media.
  • Maybe Todd
    But I know from watching all these MSM stations that what MSRC says is pretty accurate! But looking at the raw data you could then cross reference it with recordings of the broadcasts to see if there was an undo spin.

    I don't need to cause I can see it without them pointing it out. And hearing myself yell at the morons on the tv.
  • well Joyce you can also
    Go to media matters and see "facts" also. The problem with MSRC is they are giving their opinion on what they say someone else is saying or doing and it is skewed by who and what they decide to look at. As an example if NBC says "Obama has succesful meeting with GM chairman" then MSRC will interpret that how they want. If they believe it's a good thing he met with them then they will not scrutinize it or question it. If they disagree with him meeting then suddenly the media is shilling. I am not saying the media is not liberal because it is true. Just like it is true Fox, talk radio, Washington Times, WSJ, NYP, are all conservative. All that said MSRC isn't really studying how the media coverage of Obama. They are simply commenting on coverage when they disagree with the people being covered. If Obama came out and made a very strong anti abortion statement and the press phrased it as showing leadership while bucking his party do you think the MSRC would say the media is shilling for him? Of course not because they would agree with his actions. In the past administration the MSRC never stopped to point out the slobbering love fest Fox had with Bush. Instead then it was how the mainstream media hated him. They never stop to scrutinize conservative coverage of people or events. Media Matters does the exact same thing in reverse. Two peas in a pod as far as I'm concerened.
  • Of course they didn't call him a socialist ...
    Of course they didn't call Obama a socialist because he is actually a fascist. Dick Morris the other night made reference to "Obama's brand of socialism" and then went on to describe what that is, his description pretty much defining fascist economics as explained in both my and my wife's college economic books. As a small business owner I can certainly tell you that he is not doing any favors for me or my employees.
  • Sure Todd
    After all, everyone has an agenda. But you can go to the site, get a pdf version of the report and if you call them they will provide you with the raw data if you would like to dispute any of it. They actually welcome that kind of scrutiny.
  • media bias
    I was also shocked to wake up this morning and find the sun rising in the east.
  • Media
    Just to let the true free speech fans on this blog know, there is some talk of a federally financed newspaper bail out plan under the name of journalism fund. Isnt that just peachy keen.
  • Media research Center
    They couldn't possibly have their own bias could they? They are basically the right wing version of Media Matters. Neither are paragons of virtue or honesty.
  • @ Ivan
    Bravo! Someone else is paying attention.
  • Obama
    What would you expect from the "lamestream media." I am so afraid of what our country is coming to and the number of people than cannot see what is happening. How much "stimulus" have you seen or felt?
  • I have to agree with
    joyce..I work for one of jeffies companies and weve been building monstorous amounts of parts for these special green jobs for the past 3 years.just recently our orders have declined drastically but we have a level load which we periodically fill.he will cash in big time as usual then vote himself along with the board of directors a monster bonus as usual and then the stock will once again go down the toilet.as usual only the special handshake society aka jeffies buddies will know when and how to act in order to profit at the share holders expense.ive been there several years and know exactly what to expect this guy is exactly what the board of directors ordered from neutron jack welch a puppet which they can control and lay blame on when the going gets tough and fingers begin to fly.and they will fly very soon.
  • Hope you guys realize...
    Even if McCain had won the election literally everything that Obama has done would have still happened. Our President and Congress are under the control of a group of oligarchs which are literally liquidating the US and selling us off. It is ridiculous that Boortz is not on this. The Federal Reserve has $9 trillion of off the book cash that they cannot account for plus $1 trillion that they gave to the IMF to expand. WAKE THE **** up people this is the big one.
  • communal prosperity
    I think he is joking, The site is not subtle at all, it is about as subtle as a sledgehammer on a glass table. What a hoot
  • Jason Sanborn - OMG
    That stupid site you have been posting on every thread has GOT to be a joke!

    CCCP - don't you get it?
  • It is important
    For the world to see a favorable image of OUR President. He is not only responsible for our Country, but he is our front line representative to the Global Community. How Obama is perceived reflects on each and every U.S. Citizen. The Networks are doing a fabulous job of assisting in spreading his positive message.

    http://www.CommunalProsperity.net
  • I.Moyer
    They can keep going in their liberal/leftist ways because people like Jeffrey Immelt own GE, newspapers and Broadcasting companies! See Jeffie is set to profit BIG TIME from Obama's Green policies. So they (he's just one) really don't care if their stations or papers make money, they OWE President Obama. This is payback.
  • Yearly Budgets,and Emerg. War Funding Requests
    NavyBuckeye,
    My question was and is why was the funding for the wars carried throughtout Bush years as a Emergency War? The first request was a emergency request, the following years request were just a rape on the Treasury and the taxpayers!
    These yearly requests (after '02) for more and more war money were never put in the next years budget for many reasons? Do you know why?
  • Funny to see the liberal trolls emerge from their basements
    Neal, you must have hit a nerve. All this liberal drivel that the conservative movement is "over" and "history" is hilarious! Folks, always point to a liberal that Obozo won the popular vote by only 9 million. By default that indicates that the conservative movement is far from dead and that their majority is razor-thin. Another fact: younger voters did NOT turn out in higher percentages in this election compared to the last election. Another fact: the liberal base is highly concentrated in the Northeast and the West coast. This indicates that their electoral base is highly regionalized. There are no national "trends" towards the left.

    National Socialism is being forced upon us with the help of a media that is motivated by special interests (TimeWarner, General Electric). Wake up, folks! It happened in Germany in 1933 and it's happening here right now!
  • Yes Maureen...
    the sane answer is that the funding for the war had to come from separate bills, ones that were under their own scrutiny. They were called appropriations.

    Not unlike these massive government bailouts and stimulus packages...the President actually has the authority by the Constitution to operate a military force........

    But hey don't let the Constitution get in your way...Obama hasn't yet.
  • Obama is black
    All this navel gazing as to why the media can't look at Obama objectively. Anyone with half a brain knows that objectivity and racial politics are about as compatible as Mozart and Dwight Yoakem.
    What a shame for America that the first black president was a socialist.
  • MSM
    Who exactly constitutes the mainstream media?

    Its sounds eerily similar to the "evil rich" - who (or what level of monetary value) exactly is rich?
  • Can someone please explain...
    Yes, I know...some people are going to call me stupid and ignorant, but I'm going to ask anyway. I have only in the last couple of years been following the Bush/Obama insanity.

    Why is most of the media so bloody liberal? Liberals just don't make sense a lot of the time. Liberal media's ratings are plummeting on TV. How is supporting these people to their advantage? Plummeting ratings means plummeting advertising dollars, doesn't it? Liberal newspapers are going in the toilet. How much of that is the Internet, and how much is that no type of common sense person is going to read that trash? I'm not sure I get it.
  • Maureen
    Who cares!?! We know we've been lied to for decades. Bush is gone, it's time to work on the current batch of liars. Do you believe Obama more than you did Bush? That would be sad. I don't believe Bush more than I do Obama. Doing the "where were you when" stuff is not helping the situation NOW. We have an increasing problem. THEY ARE ALL THE SAME!
  • Stan Gable
    The Daily Show and Colbert Report are the only news shows his mom will let him watch.
  • How will History treat the Presses complicity in the disastrous Oboma presidency?
    Does the LSM ever stop to think about how they will be judged?

    Any Objective observer – especially ones that examines this 'soft tyranny' through the lens of history -will most assuredly come to the conclusion that the 'Enchanted press' has gone from mere bias to outright advocacy.

    Again, how will the LSM be judged for this by historians and others down the road?
  • Bush years Budget,where's the war costs?
    Which yearly budgets did Bush put the money in for the War in Iraq/Afgahn from '01 -'09? Oh that's right, it wasn't in any of his budgets! During the Bushie years the war wasn't included in any of his budgets, anyone have a sane answer why?
  • Stan Gable
    Stan Gable...Man, do you have any idea of what you just said by admitting what you watch for your so-called "news"?Your complete intelligence has now been exposed.I will no longer even read anything you post as I see you are the very personification of the uninformed,unintelligent,vacant minded trolls that are clueless as to the imminent direction of our country and vote in the same manner.Some people show the results of our gene pool getting polluted.
  • @Copyleft only commenting on buzzwords...
    "In the days before the President unveiled his unprecedented $3.5 trillion budget -- with a record-shattering $1.75 trillion deficit -- four out of five statements on the evening newscasts parroted the White House spin that Obama was a deficit fighter."

    I didn't see Copyleft give his opinion on this.

    I will concede that the terms "earth shattering", "parroted", and "spin" indicate MRC's point of view. But underneath that, you can't deny the fact that the media reports on Obama as a deficit fighter while at the same time increasing the deficit. They don't bother comparing this projected deficit against Bush or any past President, nor do they ask for the other side's opinion. Instead, they just echo what the White House says, or trump it up. THAT is the bias we have today.
  • Moron alert
    Daily Show and Colbert as news.... aw geez there just is no hope for some people.
  • Weird
    Isnt it weird how republcans think all the rest of the news media is biased except for Fox News, and the rest of the world thinks all the news media is unbiased except for Fox News? Sounds to me like someone is stubborn. Personally I just watch the Daily Show and Colbert Report since they are the only shows that actually do the reporting.
  • Dem No Apology
    You really are lost in the woods. You claim to be a Democrat but what you have in Washington is no longer Democrat or Republican. You and I have been lied to for decades. I'm starting to see it, you are still in denial.

    And people are starting to get mad, so the ratings for these shows you say are on the say out are going up!

    Conservatives are still here buddy. Don't stand in the way, you might get stepped on.
  • Aww, poor babies
    So the MRC is all upset that nobody's using the far-right buzzword "socialism" to describe President Obama's policies.

    Geez, doesn't that just prove how biased the media is? After all, they refuse to call taxation "government theft at gunpoint" too!

    And they don't employ the rest of the right-wing's favorite lexicon of buzzwords either: they don't say Islamofascists, or Death Tax, or Activist Judges, or ANY of the True and Accurate Descriptions of How Things Really Are (in right-wing fantasyland, that is).

    Darn ol' biased media, with their accurate coverage of reality-based events instead of injections of Rabid Right hysteria... it's UNFAIR, that's what it is! Anybody who doesn't share our bias is BIASED!

    Hee hee! Funny stuff, Neal! Keep those outrage engines stoked and running; America needs the entertainment.
  • No Surprise
    I think we can stop drumming up evidence of a media bias. It's so glaringly obvious that even a blind person could see it.
  • Right wing radio is history like the GOP!
    I am watching history of right wing fade, and Limbaugh, Boortz, Ingraham, Savage, Hannity, get the credit for it, since they are like attack dogs with rabies, attacking their masters the elite, intellectuals in GOP, which is slowly but surely happening, 12% of clear channels employee's laid off, is a sign, but the divide in the GOP is bigger sign, GOP leadership, the elected variety not the unelected right wing radio icons are in civil war, and the thing the unelected self appointed leadership in right wing radio has forgotten is they do not hold the power, only were given it when it served their masters purpose, now they are like dogs with rabies, bitting their own masters, and GOP will muzzle them in time, since right wing hate radio only got popular in last 10 years, its not like some historical media idea that has been around for ages, with delcining GOP popularity, divided GOP between the pragmatists whom know racism, xenophobia, bigotry will not work anymore to win elections is in a quandry, what to do with their old war dogs the right wing radio commentators whom now have decided they are the defacto leaders of the GOP? I see the writing on the wall and they do not, since obviously biting the hand that fed you is not wise, only one has gotten smart and abandoned right wing radio and retreated to television, Oreilly, he I think see's the writing on the wall! But the rest rant, rave, like mad men/women as if they are elected by the majority of the people and can change things! But reality is the muzzle is coming and it will come from the right wing GOP elected officials whom might use a disguise as Democrats did it but they will have their hand in it! :-)
  • It's been a lonnnnnng time since the Lying Statist Media {LSM} has been just Biased.
    This just confirms that fact.

    And People, Please stop referring to the leftists as 'Liberal', the difference between “Liberals” of old – Classical Liberals and the Leftists of today by several orders of magnitude.

    With the agenda the leftists are pushing these days, they are correctly identified as Statists.

    And NO, I don't give a flying fornication that speaking the truth about those people will somehow push more into their camp:

    1. That contention is BS in the first place, and

    2.I'd rather be condemned for speaking the truth, than praised for remaining silent.

    Thank you.
  • How long
    I just don't see how much longer the libs can keep this house of cards together for another 3 1/2 years. How much spin can you put on someone before people start wising up? Probably when they are standing on the unemployment line wondering what the heck happened to "hope and change"?
send to a friend  view as printer-friendly  RSS feeds
advertisement
advertisement
advertisement