America The Beautiful
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Inflation is eating away at the heart of America’s small businesses who weary of Biden‘s indifference
By Salena Zito
LIGONIER-Of the four restaurants Rick McQuaide owns across several counties in Western Pennsylvania, one is barely making a profit, two are losing money and the fourth has been “temporarily” closed for far longer than he ever anticipated.
The American labor crisis has hit all the small businesses on this one street
The 58-year-old small businessman from nearby Cambria County has one word for why he finds himself in this position — and it isn’t the pandemic.
“It is inflation,” he said flatly.
McQuaide — whose family has also been in the trucking and logistics industry for 70 years — said what frustrates him is the reaction coming from the White House and much of the national media on the severity of the problem.
Click here for the full story.
The American labor crisis has hit all the small businesses on this one street
The 58-year-old small businessman from nearby Cambria County has one word for why he finds himself in this position — and it isn’t the pandemic.
“It is inflation,” he said flatly.
McQuaide — whose family has also been in the trucking and logistics industry for 70 years — said what frustrates him is the reaction coming from the White House and much of the national media on the severity of the problem.
Click here for the full story.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Report: Syrian Ballisitic Missile Site ‘Threatens Almost All of Israel.’
+++++++++++++++++++
Why did Fauci hide this? Trump took it and Democrats made him out to be a fool. Has everything come to be character assassination and politized?
BOMBSHELL: Veritas Documents Reveal DC Bureaucrats Had Evidence Ivermectin and Hydroxychloroquine Were Effective in Treating COVID -- BUT HID THIS FROM PUBLIC
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Putin has the upper hand and is playing his cards effectively:
What Putin Really Wants From the Ukraine Crisis
By Bret Stephens
Grave may have been the mistakes of Donald Rumsfeld, but George W. Bush’s first defense secretary did have a gift for memorable phrases. One of them — “weakness is provocative” — explains the predicament we again find ourselves in with Russia’s belligerence against Ukraine and NATO.
Let’s recap how we got here.
■ In August 2008, Russia invaded Georgia and took control of two of its provinces. The Bush administration protested but did almost nothing. After Barack Obama won the White House that fall, he pursued a “reset” with Russia. In 2012, he cut U.S. force levels in Europe to their lowest levels in postwar history and mocked Mitt Romney for calling Russia our principal geopolitical threat.
■ In September 2013, Obama famously retreated from his red line against Bashar al-Assad’s use of nerve gas in Syria, accepting instead a Russian offer of mediation that was supposed to have eliminated al-Assad’s chemical arsenal. That arsenal was never fully destroyed, but Vladimir Putin took note of Obama’s palpable reluctance to get involved.
■ In February 2014, Russia used “little green men” to seize and then annex Crimea. The Obama administration protested but did almost nothing. Russia then took advantage of unrest in eastern Ukraine to shear off two Ukrainian provinces while sparking a war that has lasted seven years and cost more than 13,000 lives. Obama responded with weak sanctions on Russia and a persistent refusal to arm Ukraine.
■ In 2016, Donald Trump ran for office questioning how willing America should be to defend vulnerable NATO members. In 2017 he tried to block new sanctions on Russia but was effectively overruled by Congress. The Trump administration did ultimately take a tougher line on Russia and approved limited arms sales to Ukraine. But Trump also tried to hold hostage military assistance to Ukraine for political favors before he was exposed, leading to his first impeachment.
Which brings us to Joe Biden, who ran for office promising a tougher line on Russia. It has been anything but. In May, his administration waived sanctions against Russia’s Nord Steam 2 gas pipeline to Germany, which, when operational, will increase Moscow’s energy leverage on Europe. Since coming to office, the administration has done little to increase the relatively paltry flow of military aid to Ukraine. In the face of a Russian invasion, it will be as effective as trying to put out a forest fire by peeing on it.
Then there was the fiasco of our withdrawal from Afghanistan. “In the aftermath of Saigon redux,” I wrote at the time, “every enemy will draw the lesson that the United States is a feckless power.” The current Ukraine crisis is as much the child of Biden’s Afghanistan debacle as the last Ukraine crisis was the child of Obama’s Syria debacle.
Now the administration is doubling down on a message of weakness by threatening “massive consequences for Russia” if it invades Ukraine, nearly all in economic sanctions. That’s bringing a knife to the proverbial gunfight.
Imagine this not-so-far-fetched scenario. Russian forces move on a corner of Ukraine. The United States responds by cutting off Russia from the global banking system. But the Kremlin (which has built its gold and foreign-currency reserves to record highs) doesn’t sit still. It responds to sanctions by cutting off gas supplies in midwinter to the European Union — which gets more than 40 percent of its gas from Russia. It demands a Russia-Europe security treaty as the price of the resumption of supplies. And it freezes the United States out of the bargain, at least until Washington shows good will by abandoning financial sanctions.
Such a move would force Washington to either escalate or abase itself — and this administration would almost certainly choose the latter. It would fulfill Putin’s long-held ambition to break the spine of NATO. It would further entice China into a similar mind-set of aggression, probably against Taiwan.
It would be to America’s global standing what the Suez Crisis was to Britain’s. At least Pax Britannica could, in its twilight, give way to Pax Americana. But to what does Pax Americana give way?
What can the United States do instead? We should break off talks with Russia now: No country ought to expect diplomatic rewards from Washington while it threatens the destruction of our friends. We should begin an emergency airlift of military equipment to Ukraine, on the scale of Richard Nixon’s 1973 airlift to Israel, including small arms useful in a guerrilla war. And we should reinforce U.S. forces in frontline NATO states, particularly Poland and the Baltics.
None of this may be sufficient to stop Russia from invasion, which would be a tragedy for Ukrainians. But Putin is playing for bigger stakes in this crisis — another sliver of Ukrainian territory is merely a secondary prize.
What he really wants to do is end the Western alliance as we have known it since the Atlantic Charter. As for the United States, two decades of bipartisan American weakness in the face of his aggression has us skating close to a geopolitical debacle. Biden needs to stand tough on Ukraine in order to save NATO.
+++
Putin Is Running Rings Around the West
While U.S. and European leaders natter about soft power, Russia’s president is making power moves.
By Walter Russell Mead
Nobody knows whether Vladimir Putin will invade Ukraine, but it is increasingly clear that a divided and confused Western alliance doesn’t know how to deal with the challenge he poses.
Lost in a narcissistic fog of grandiose pomposity, Western diplomats spent the past decade dismissing the Russian president as the knuckle-dragging relic of a discarded past. As then-Secretary of State John Kerry sniffed during Mr. Putin’s 2014 invasion of Ukraine, “You just don’t in the 21st century behave in 19th century fashion by invading another country on a completely trumped up pretext.”
Neville Chamberlain learned more from failure at Munich than the current generation of Western leaders learned from failure in Crimea. Convinced that the old rules of power politics don’t apply in our enlightened posthistorical century, Europeans nattered on about soft power only to find themselves locked out of key U.S.-Russia talks over Ukraine. As China and Russia grew more powerful and assertive, Americans enthusiastically embraced the politics of mean-spirited polarization and domestic culture wars. Now the Biden administration is simultaneously proclaiming overseas that America is back, in all its order-building awesomeness, and maintaining at home that democracy is one voting-rights bill away from collapse.
Pathetic throwback that he is, Mr. Putin used his time differently, rebuilding the Soviet Union under the nose of a feckless and distracted West. Because Russia hasn’t annexed breakaway republics, many observers underestimate how successful Mr. Putin’s reassembly of the U.S.S.R. has been. But it is hegemony, not uniformity, that he wants. Stalin insisted on enrolling Ukraine and Belarus as founding members of the United Nations while they were part of the Soviet Union; Mr. Putin might be happy to keep them nominally independent under Russian control. In many Soviet republics, Moscow ruled through local strongmen. When the Soviet Union collapsed, leaders like Azerbaijan’s Ayaz Mutalibov, Turkmenistan’s Saparmurat Niyazov and Kazakhstan’s Nursultan Nazarbayev made a seamless transition to running the republics as personal fiefs. Mr. Putin’s goal is to re-establish ultimate control while leaving subordinate rulers in place.
It’s working. In 2020 he reasserted Russian control over the South Caucasus by ending the Azerbaijani-Armenian war on his terms. Last spring as the West huffed and puffed, Mr. Putin kept Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko in power. Last week Mr. Putin established himself as the supreme arbiter of Kazakhstan, providing the political and military assistance that allowed President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev to crush a revolt. In most of the former Soviet Union today, Mr. Putin decides who rules and who weeps. Of the 15 constituent republics of the old Soviet Union, only five (the three Baltic states, Moldova and Ukraine) have held him at arm’s length. Georgia clings precariously to the shreds of a once-robust independence; the American withdrawal from Afghanistan leaves countries like Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan more dependent on Moscow than ever.
Meanwhile, the West is less well positioned to withstand Russian pressure on Ukraine than it was in 2014. Europe’s doubts about American commitment and wisdom are greater than they were then. German pacifism is more deeply entrenched. Brexit has undermined relations among Europe’s chief military powers. Europe’s dependency on Russian oil and natural gas leaves the West as vulnerable as ever to energy blackmail—and sharply limits the West’s ability to impose economic sanctions on a partner without which it can neither heat its homes nor run its factories. Mr. Putin also knows that economic sanctions will fall more heavily on Europe than on the U.S., deepening the fractures in an alliance he hopes to destroy. With oil prices above $80 a barrel and China backing his play, Mr. Putin may be less vulnerable to economic sanctions than the White House hopes.
Washington, meanwhile, is unintentionally but unmistakably telegraphing its vulnerability to blackmail. With the Biden administration lobbying Congress to block sanctions on the Nord Stream 2 pipeline, Moscow can’t be blamed for thinking that the Americans are prepared to pay a price to preserve “stability.”
Mr. Putin is having a great crisis so far and seems to have little to fear. His successes in Belarus and Kazakhstan have thoroughly cowed domestic opposition. The runup in energy prices gives him a cash cushion. The crisis has again put Russia at the center of world politics, demonstrated Western weakness, terrified Ukraine, and highlighted Mr. Putin’s mastery of the game of thrones. His decisions about what to do next will depend entirely on what he thinks will advance Russia’s core goals. Haggle at the bargaining table while Western unity frays? Seize a chunk of Ukraine while the West sputters with impotent moralism? Magnanimously accept Western concessions and return to stability until the next time?
Mr. Putin’s success is the measure of Western intellectual and political failure. Until Western leaders emerge from the mists of pos-thistorical illusion and recover the lost art of effective foreign policy, he will continue to make gains at our expense.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
In Case You Missed It - Hate in the US: Unmasking the Antisemitism of CAIR and Other Muslim Brotherhood Offshoots
EMET via gmail.mcsv.net (left click below picture)
|
In survey after survey, fully 90% of the American Jewish public believes that antisemitism is a problem in the United States, and it has been growing over the last several years. As we are all aware, there are many factors that have contributed to this problem, and it exists on far right as well as the far left of the American political spectrum.
Some of the major Muslim organizations, such as CAIR, ISNA, American Muslims for Palestine and many other spin-off groups of the Muslim Brotherhood have contributed to the problem. They might not be representative of how a growing number of Muslims in many parts of the world, such as those in the Gulf states actually feel about the state of Israel and the Jewish people.
About the speaker:
Steve Emerson is considered one of the leading authorities on Islamic extremist networks, financing and operations as well national security and intelligence. He is the Executive Director of The Investigative Project on Terrorism, a non-profit organization that maintains one of the world’s largest storehouses of archival data and intelligence on Islamic and Middle Eastern terrorist groups.
Emerson and his staff frequently provide briefings to U.S. government and law enforcement agencies, Congress members and congressional committees. They also produce print and electronic media on terrorist financing, the operational networks of Al Qaeda, Hamas, Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad and the rest of the worldwide Islamic militant spectrum.
Emerson launched The Investigative Project on Terrorism in 1995, following the November 1994 broadcast of his documentary film, “Jihad in America,” which exposed clandestine operations of militant Islamic terrorist groups on American soil.
Emerson is one of the first terrorism experts to have testified and warned about the threat of Islamic militant networks operating in the United States and their connections worldwide. In a pioneering congressional testimony delivered in 1998, he specifically warned about the threat of Osama Bin Laden’s network. Nearly every one of the terrorist suspects and groups first identified in his 1994 film have been indicted, convicted or deported since 9-11.
Emerson has worked at CNN and US News & World Report and freelanced for the New York Times Magazine and the New Republic. He is also the author or co-author of six books on terrorism and national security. He has a BA and MA from Brown University and once ran a marathon in 2 hours, 59 minutes, a feat he was never able to repeat.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
When Trump took one of these drugs he was s mocked by Democrats and excoriated by the mass media. It also worked. Democrats have engaged in character assassination's as well as pollicization of everything. Why? Fauci joined in as well..
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2022/01/bombshell-
veritas-documents-reveal-dc-bureaucrats-evidence-ivermectin-
hydroxychloroquine-effective-treating-covid-hid-public/
++++++++++++++++++++++
veritas-documents-reveal-dc-bureaucrats-evidence-ivermectin-
hydroxychloroquine-effective-treating-covid-hid-public/
++++++++++++++++++++++
Resurrecting the Hunter Biden episode:
Grab the Popcorn: Hunter Biden's Ex-Wife to Release Tell-All Memoir
BY MATT MARGOLIS
Between his drug use, his China dealings, Burisma, the shady art exhibit, that little incident with a gun, and the whole thing with the laptop, Hunter Biden has been the repeated source of headaches for his father Joe.
And he just got another.
Hunter Biden’s ex-wife, Kathleen Buhle, will be releasing a “damning memoir” about their 24-year marriage, his sex, drugs, and strip club addictions, and his affair with his late brother Beau’s widow.
The book is slated for release on June 14, 2022. According to the book description on Amazon, it is a “page-turning and heart-breaking” memoir.
Determined to build her family on a foundation of love, Kathleen was convinced her and Hunter’s commitment to each other could overcome any obstacle. But when Hunter’s drinking evolved into dependency, she was forced to learn how rapidly and irrevocably a marriage can fall apart under the merciless power of addiction. When the lies became insurmountable, Kathleen was forced to reckon with the compromises she had made to try to save her marriage. She wondered if she could survive on her own.
The result is a memoir that is page-turning and heart-breaking. Here Kathleen asks why she kept so much hidden—from her daughters and herself—for so many years, why she became dependent on one man, and why she was more faithful to a vow of secrecy than to her own truth. This inspiring chronicle of radical honesty and self-actualization speaks to women who have lost part of their identity and want to reclaim it.
According to text messages found on Hunter Biden’s computer, Hunter told his father in March 2019 that “you guys are unreasonably scared of Kathleen.”
Perhaps this memoir contains information that Joe Biden should be scared of. At the very least, it will revive interest in the scandal-plagued Hunter in the months leading up to the midterm elections.
++++++++++++++++++++++
++++++++++++++++++++++
This was sent to me a by a dear friend and fellow memo reader and fits with my second partial review of the book I am reading about the mass-media and how it walked away from the underdog and became elitists and joined at the hip with the Democrat Party which also deserted the "deplorables."
The Sinking Ship of the Democratic-Media Alliance
The Democratic-media alliance gambled everything on 2020 but in corrupting democracy in the name of protecting the country from an enemy of democracy, they tied themselves to a sinking ship.
By Conrad Black
January 10, 2022
Almost no one seems to grasp the colossal irony of the current American political condition. The uniquequality of it is that the country is divided between two political forces which, in the tedious hyperbole of contemporary political jargon, view each other as an “existential threat to democracy.” The Democrats can’t sell the bunk that January 6 was an “insurrection;” they can’t wish away concerns about the integrity of the 2020 election. All they have is the tired claim that Trump is a threat to democracy, and in their advocacy of that falsehood, they have made themselves the threat to democracy.
Trump emerged politically in 2015 to universal mockery. Nothing could have been more certain than that this vulgar and sleazy huckster (as he was portrayed,not without some reason), would bomb out trying to recalibrate his downmarket celebrity brand to catapult him into the White House.
As Trump cleaned up in the 2016 Republican primaries, the Democratic strategists reached to the bottom of their campaign bag of tricks. Late in the campaign came the 11-year-old Billy Bush tape, in which Trump had made some inelegant locker-room macho comments about how a celebrity could take almost unlimited liberties with women. This failed to kill him. It was stale, dated, and not exactly a startling revelation.
Next, the Democrats produced a pastiche of lies and defamations collected by a former British intelligence officer that, with the illegal collaboration of the senior intelligence agencies and the FBI, was leaked to the media as the fruit of an intelligence investigation—and thus did not require journalistic corroboration. Despite fervent efforts to get this story out, it had only just broken the surface when Trump won the election.
The Democrats then instantly switched from inevitable Clinton victory mode to impeachment mode and fastened the lead weight of the completely fabricated Trump-Russia election-fixing collusion fraud around Trump’s ankle. When Trump announced that the Obama Administration had been tapping his campaign telephones, the media thunderously declared that he had no proof. Yet when the proof eventually emerged, they had moved on the first of the phony impeachments over an unexceptionable call to the president of Ukraine.
Finally, COVID enabled a mighty smear-job of Trump as “anti-science” and forced an economic and academic shut-down that allowed the hostile media to blame him for the resulting recession.
Although Trump had a successful administration—practically eliminating illegal immigration, unemployment, and oil imports, shaping up the Western alliance, and deterring China, North Korea, and Iran from the endless provocations they had inflicted on previous presidents—it was impossible for him to defend himself against conditions created by the COVID pandemic and magnified by the Trump-hating media. For good measure, the Democrats seized the opportunity created by the pandemic, to alter election and vote-counting laws in the six swing states they focused on (Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin).
In an election of 156 million voters and more than 40 million harvested ballots (i.e. those of unverifiable validity and cast by people other than those to whom the votes ostensibly belonged), where a shift of 46,000 votes in Pennsylvania and any two of Arizona, Georgia, and Wisconsin would have flipped the election to Trump in the Electoral College, 2020 takes its place along with the highly contested contests of 1876 (Hayes-Tilden), 1960 (Kennedy-Nixon), and 2000 (George W. Bush-Gore).
It is not clear who really won. Hayes and Tilden worked out a deal. Nixon declined Eisenhower’s urging to challenge the 1960 election as he thought it would be bad for the country (for which he has received no credit from all the authors and beneficiaries of the vast Kennedy mythos). Al Gore, at least, received a rushed day in court. Yet the judicial system abdicated in 2020 and the Supreme Court declined to hear the claim of the attorney general of Texas supported by 18 other states against the six swing states that they had violated the constitutional duty to ensure a fair election. None of the issues involving the integrity of the election on constitutional grounds was tried on the merits, and Trump and his followers are right in their anger at not having received a serious judicial hearing.
After the 95 percent anti-Trump national political media conducted Joe Biden’s campaign for him as he hid from the pandemic, the oligarchic social media platform cartel canceled and banished Trump (and the New York Post) from their platforms, Trump’s opponents outspent him 2-1 (including $419 million from Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg, practically all of which went to Democratic precincts), and scammed the polls in several of the swing states, Democrats and anti-Trump Republicans achieved a Pyrrhic electoral victory. Their only argument for the last six years has been vilification of Trump, and the only fragment of that tired screed that still resonates at all is that Trump is a gangster and a putschist who revealed his tendencies with a supposed “insurrection” at the Capitol on January 6.
In the circumstances, Trump was restrained. The last thing he wanted was vandalism at the Capitol by anyone claiming to support him.
The Democrats, along with America and the world, are now stuck with the most incompetent administration in the country’s history. Biden clearly lacks the mental energy required of such a challenging position, and Kamala Harris seems simply to be a moron. None of their policies attract majority support from the country and their great COVID ally of 2020 is now an albatross around their necks. Inflation is eating the incomes of the middle- and working-classes, the southern U.S. border is open not only to millions of destitute people but to a large number of serious undesirables who are flooding in. China, Russia, Iran, are all exploiting American weakness and the departure from Afghanistan was the greatest military fiasco in U.S. history.
Consequently, Democratic leaders in Congress have effectively given up getting the grossly unfeasible Build Back Better giveaway through, and are pushing their only reelection hope: the Freedom to Vote and John R. Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Acts. These measures would make it difficult to update voting rolls, would ban highly popular voter ID rules, expand mail-in balloting, restrict efforts to validate signatures, and promote ballot harvesting. When taken with the Democratic effort to admit as many people as possible to the United States and permit them to vote without the irritating bourgeois formality of first becoming citizens, this is a recipe for ensuring that the Democrats and look-alike Republicans never again suffer the embarrassment that they did in 2016 of actually losing an election to a conservative opponent.
In all of their antics, from the Trump-Russia collusion nonsense through the very questionable election and now the effort to impose a durable theft of an electoral advantage implausibly disguised as protecting African-American voting rights, the Democrats have forced Republicans to denounce the Democrats as the real threat to democracy.
The national political media, complicit as they are in the Russia hoax and other anti-Trump frauds, have confirmed their embrace of the Democrats, come what may. They are staring down the barrel of a Trump return in 2024, either personally or through a candidate he endorses, in varying states of denial.
The distinguished Brit Hume, not apparently a Trump-hater, still claims Trump has no legitimate complaint over the 2020 election. (He knows better.) Peggy Noonan, otherwise the most gracious of women, writes viciously about Trump while still giving this wax-works effigy of a president advice on how to be a more effective orator. Andrew McCarthy, an outstanding legal scholar and former prosecutor, and quasi-Trump-hater, took the Russian bunk much too seriously, and is now reduced to acknowledging that Trump had just complaints about the COVID-related voting regulation changes, but that they may have been legal. If they facilitated a materially tainted election result (very likely), McCarthy knows as well as anyone that the Democratic vote-rigging derring-do in the swing states was not legal.
The Democratic media have been exposed as morally bankrupt in their rabid partisanship and dishonesty. The Democratic-media alliance gambled everything on 2020 but in corrupting democracy in the name of protecting the country from an enemy of democracy, and in inflicting upon America an almost totally incompetent administration, the Democrats and their media allies tied themselves to a sinking ship.
Donald Trump has many failings but he is no threat to democracy. The elites have failed: the bipartisan political class, cowardly big business leaders, Wall Street, Silicon Valley, Hollywood, professional sports, almost all the political media, and the academy; all have failed miserably. This is now a war to the political death, and the Democrats have had their great feast of Belshazzar, and they will soon learn that they “have been weighed in the balance and have been found wanting” by the people.
About Conrad Black
Conrad Black has been one of Canada’s most prominent financiers for 40 years, and was one of the leading newspaper publishers in the world as owner of the British telegraph newspapers, the Fairfax newspapers in Australia, the Jerusalem Post, Chicago Sun-Times and scores of smaller newspapers in the U.S., and most of the daily newspapers in Canada. He is the author of authoritative biographies of Franklin D. Roosevelt and Richard Nixon, one-volume histories of the United States and Canada, and most recently of Donald J. Trump: A President Like No Other. He is a member of the British House of Lords as Lord Black of Crossharbour.
+++
When Pulitzer started his newspaper his focus was on the "little man" the working class. Eventually, The New York Times discovered elites were a better class to focus on because that would attract "high end" add revenue and more profits. Over time, 91`% of the NYT's readership identified with Democrats.
For a time, cultural equality allowed newspapers to focus on a massive audience. That eventually changed in the 60's, as a class of journalists began to shift upwards. NYT readership was more educated, more sophisticated, more likely to have international interests unlike the "older " generation. Reporters began to be told to interview and interpret, not tell readers what they learned. In a not so subtle way, newspaper biases shifted from the common man to liberals. Journalists, themselves, also became overwhelmingly liberal.
Readership focus shifted and newspapers, like the NYT's, began to provide "service journalism." In other words, restaurant listings, shopping guides, doctor ranking etc. Select papers began to expand their suburban readership as they abandoned the welfare mother and working class-residents. The L.A Times boasted they "did not sell papers in Watts." Furthermore, because of poorer education the NYT's found it difficult to hire black journalists as well.
Then TV came along and caused more consolidation in newspapers, causing the owners to share the interests of those in big business. By the latter half of the 20thth Century the era of the New Media Monopoly had occurred. As newspapers went public their interests were driven by stockholders and advertisers and less citizen oriented. This shift resulted in a readership that was predominantly native born and white. The "Rich Man" paper syndrome developed. Less and less focus was devoted to workplace, more to office workers etc. Eventually the shift went from citizen workers to consumers.
Conseqeuntly, working class America turned away from getting their news from Newspapers to other sources. This created a vacuum which, the author believes, FOX and Murdoch filled. To liberals the conservative media became nothing but a big trash heap of racism etc. In essence those who did not go to college lost out and a media outlet. Media became polarized more by class than political lines
I still have more to read.
+++
Can't believe anything you see anymore much less what you read and hear.
No comments:
Post a Comment