Sunday, January 24, 2016

Gannett Backs Clinton And Rubio In Iowa Caucuses

The CIA newspaper chain of record weighs in on the Iowa caucuses with just a little more than a week away before the first voters in the nation cast ballots in this year's presidential election. The Gannett rag in the Hawkeye State is the Des Moines Register. The leftist editors in Des Moines tap Hillary Clinton and Marco Rubio as the candidates they prefer for the Democratic and Republican nominations, respectively. The leading Republican candidates, Ted Cruz and Donald Trump, refused to even meet with the leftist editorial board. The only surprise is that eggheads didn't support Jeb Bush since the newspaper has always favored Bushes over other Republican candidates in the past. Presumably, even they've given up on any hope of another Bush being nominated by the Republican Party.

The editors at The Register have to live in a parallel universe to muster up the effusive praise they had for Clinton, whom they described as an "outstanding candidate" with unmatched "depth or breath of her knowledge and experience." Clinton is described as a "thoughtful, hardworking public servant who has earned the respect of leaders at home and abroad." "She stands ready to take on the most demanding job in the world." Her shifting opinions on gay marriage, immigration and a myriad of other issues is a "virtue" the other candidates lack according to the editors.

Yeah, she was well-prepared for her demanding job as Secretary of State when Ambassador Chris Stevens telephoned to say he was going to die if he didn't get help right away in Benghazi when the American diplomatic post there came under attack on September 11, 2012. She went to bed while terrorists killed the ambassador and three other Americans without lifting a finger to help them. She was quite effective at using the State Department like an ATM machine for the Clinton Foundation and the clients of her husband, who earned tens of millions in speaking and consulting fees courtesy of her actions at the State Department. There's not a single acknowledgement by The Register editors that Clinton is under investigation by the FBI and quite obviously guilty of committing felonies for her reckless and illegal handling of the nation's most sensitive classified documents by using a private server to conduct official government business. And ISIS (or ISIL, if you prefer) never rose up on her watch.

The editors say the Republican choice offers a choice between "anger, pessimism and fear" or a new path of "restoring the American dream," which Rubio's candidacy supposedly represents, presumably because he's "the son of an immigrant bar tender and a maid." They acknowledge he lacks the executive experience of "John Kasich, Chris Christie and Jeb Bush," but they prefer Rubio because Republican voters seem to want someone who is "new or different." "He shares his compelling story and calls for a referendum on the nation's identity," the editors opine. The only criticism they had of Rubio were recent remarks he made claiming President Obama "had deliberately weakened America." Remarkably, the editors never once mentioned by name the two front-runners, Cruz and Trump, presumably because they refused to meet with them.

The general consensus by political pundits is that The Register's endorsement carries more baggage than value in Iowa because the newspaper, like all Gannett newspapers, is so void of any serious content. That is particularly true of Republican voters in the state, who share little in common with the out-of-state management staff Gannett ships in to run the newspapers the corporate media giant had gobbled up in red state America for the purpose of engaging in blatant social re-engineering. It clearly doesn't buy these newspapers to earn a profit. Every newspaper Gannett has acquired has seen its readership plummet as local content is jettisoned and converted into the ugly step-children of it flagship newspaper, USA Today.


Flogger said...

I read the Des Moines Register endorsement of $hillary. It could have been written by her campaign. It is not surprising the McMega-Media all over the USA has pushed the Coronation of Queen $hillary. It was Bill Clinton who as President signed the Telecommunications Act of 1996. This allowed the coagulation and conglomeration into the McMega-Media.

Howard Zinn mentions in his book a Peoples History of the United States - the Telecommunications Act of 1996...enabled the handful of corporations dominating the airwaves to expand their power further. Mergers enabled tighter control of information...The Latin American writer Eduardo Galeano commented..."Never have so many been held incommunicado by so few.

$hillary does have experience however she lacks wisdom. $hillary is opposed to a single payer system (Medicare for all) as Sanders has proposed. Of course she would be opposed to Medicare for all - Hillary Clinton, from 2013 to 2015, made $2,847,000 from 13 paid speeches to the health profit industry.

$hillary is not just the establishment Corporate Wall Street Democrat Candidate, she is on life support from the 1%. It must be frustrating for the Corporate Democrats to witness the Sanders Surge, when they control through their puppets in the media virtually all the content. The Corporate Democrats have been rudely shocked by the alternate path Sanders supporters have - The Internet.

Anonymous said...

John Courtney Murray, Time/Life, and the American Proposition: How the CIA's Doctrinal Warfare Program Changed the Catholic Church by Indiana author, David A. Wemhoff. Since the very term, "conspiracy theorist" had its origins in the CIA. Your readers might wish to read a well documented book on just a portion of the illegal activities of the CIA in its domestic operations. Liberals long suspected that National Review, was a CIA front and with good cause since Triumph was proven to be. The Title of this book above suggests cooperation, at the least, of Time/Life with the CIA and if it proves it's case (which it will, I think) then your suggestion that the CIA has an arrangement with Gannett is not far fetched at all. It is, in fact, likely. At least, the opinion can be tolerated even among the liberals who have traditionally not supported the CIA....they may have a point.
Looking thru these sorts of lenses one might view Obama as a CIA creation....a bit like Mayor Pete? One might be struck by the silence of the liberal lambs over the Obama gifts to Iran....though even liberals know the CIA has a long, blemished history of dealings in Iran and the Obama "deal" had Republican origins. Still, if Henry K can opine that Israel won't exist in 10 years one might be forgiven for thinking the CIA would have had a hand in it.
It does reflect well on Disraeli's observation that if the English knew how they were actually governed, they would revolt.