A large number of bloggers have noted Instapundit's
posting from an anonymous correspondent at "a major newsroom."
It's worth reading, if you've otherwise missed it.
Off the record, every suspicion you have about MSM being in the tank for O is true. We have a team of 4 people going thru dumpsters in Alaska and 4 in arizona. Not a single one looking into Acorn, Ayers or Freddiemae. Editor refuses to publish anything that would jeopardize election for O, and betting you dollars to donuts same is true at NYT, others. People cheer when CNN or NBC run another Palin-mocking but raising any reasonable inquiry into obama is derided or flat out ignored. The fix is in, and its working.Do I smell a theme for the day? Maybe, let's see…
Ann Althouse reports
on a CBS transcript of a Sarah Palin interview
that just happens to mistranscribe her
words in such a way to convey the false impression that she thinks
homosexuality can be prayed away.
Jonah Goldberg notices something odd in the media
coverage of the bailout bill's (temporary?) failure in the House:
… you know what I haven’t seen in all of the coverage of the bailout-blow-up? I haven’t seen a single interview with a Democrat who voted against this deal. I’ve seen interviews of Republicans who’ve voted for it. I’ve seen interviews of Republicans who voted against it. And, of course, I’ve seen interviews with the Democratic leadership in which they blamed the Republicans who voted against it but not the 94 Dems who voted against it.
Gwen Ifill, the moderator of the upcoming Biden-Palin debate,
has a book coming out on Inauguration Day, entitled
Breakthrough: Politics and Race in the Age of Obama.
That's a pretty impressive conflict of interest. Among the
commenters are Michelle
Malkin and Captain
Ed. But you'll want to click through to (of all publications)
Science Monitor for the picture illustration, which made me
laugh out loud. Or LOL, as the youngsters say.
And, conflict-of-interestwise, that's not all.
Viking Pundit also comments on the phenomenon, with
special attention to his recent edition of Newsweek.
The first picture of Obama (p. 5) has a sun-dappled candidate, smiling and waving to cheering fans from his campaign bus. On the next page, there is absolutely the worst possible picture of McCain, scowling on an airplane as journalists swarm around him. The caption: "Risky Business." No subtext here, folks, move along...we're all objective journalists.
If I hadn't long ago canceled my Boston Globe subscription, I
could have read today an
editorial about how "Wasilla made rape victims pay" for hospital
emergency-room rape kits and examinations. Only problem is: that's
not actually true.
The Globe is owned by the New York Times Co., whose share price,
slightly over two-thirds of its value over the past five years.
(As fugly as the overall stock market has been of late, the S&P500 index is up about 11 percent over the past five years.)
Come on guys, you're two-thirds of the way there! You can do it!
Fortunately, all those good folks will almost certainly engage in
business as usual under an Obama administration. For anyone else
seeking to utilize their First Amendment rights, however, Andrew
McCarthy indicates the
news might not be good.
This is really quite good.
Southie teen Jason is obsessed with kung-fu movies. One fateful night he gets coerced into a robbery attempt against the old Chinese man who supplies him with obscure bootleg DVDs of Bruce Lee flicks. He somehow hits a supernatural portal that flings him back to ancient China, and he's tasked to restore a weapon to the Monkey King, who long ago was tricked and immobilized by the evil Jade Warlord.
Brother, I can relate. Because that sort of thing happens to me all the time.
Jason picks up a ragtag bunch to assist in his quest: drunken master Jackie Chan, somber monk Jet Li, and a vengeful young girl named "Golden Sparrow" played by Yifei Liu. And so they set out on their peril-filled and scenic voyage…
There's a lot of humor and spectacle, and it's just a huge amount of fun watching these guys. I think Jackie Chan should get an Oscar for this. I'm not kidding, either.
Okay, maybe what he does is not, if you insist on being pedantic, "acting." But there should be some category: "Best Performance for Doing That Kind of Thing That Jackie Chan Does". And Jackie Chan would win. Maybe not every year, but definitely this one.