Souder Vs. Blumenthal, In Your Face Journalistic Malfeasance


May 19, 2010 - San Francisco, CA - - Much has been written over the past few years categorically establishing beyond question the leftist bias of the entrenched media [see for daily coverage, the Media Research Center, especially its Special Reports section,, or any number of books including Bernie Goldberg's, "Bias: A CBS Insider Exposes How the Media Distort the News"]

Understandably the media will never admit to this, regardless of how thoroughly the phenomenon is documented, another test suggesting the presence of bias and an inability to accept reality.

I have found this to be the case in dozens and dozens of off-the-record, deep background chats with journalists who simply will not admit that they are frequently nothing more than purveyors of agendized leftist propaganda.

One such conversation comes to mind in which I challenged a prominent West coast reporter - during a telephone conversation - over coverage of a speech by a key member of the G.W. Bush administration. After wrangling for several minutes over the article's almost complete failure to mention anything that this former official said during his address, this reporter finally admitted, not bias, but to the creation of a story - a controversy - where none existed because otherwise, "it wasn't news." This - translated - means it's not news unless it fits the working narrative and if it doesn't, then it will be bludgeoned into correct form.

Since I had a representative at this event I was fully aware that during the Q & A, rather than queries directed at particular aspects of the book he was pushing, instead he was continually challenged by this reporter, very aggressively, to explain what was then and remains now a small so-called "scandal" within the GOP that had absolutely nothing to do with him, his book or the previous administration.

The intent of course was to present the GOP in a poor light and hew to the central core principle of leftist activism, that being, "the issue is never the issue...the issue is always the revolution."

With this in mind let's take a brief look at the New York Times' 5/19 reportage regarding Tuesday's primary elections [see,]. Specifically we will look at the way in which two genuine scandals were presented.

The first involves the case of Indiana Republican Congressman Mark Souder who was caught with his pants down, admitting to an affair with a staffer [presumably female] and making the decision to resign [see,].

The article entitled, Citing Affair, Republican Gives Up House Seat, was written by Carl Hulse. Its first sentence starts with, "Representative Mark Souder, a conservative Republican from Indiana..."

So we have Souder identified as a member of the GOP in the title as well as the intro sentence, which also nails down that Souder is a [shudder] "conservative" - though apparently not so much of a social-conservative it seems.

Eight times in this piece the word Republican is mentioned and twice the word [double shudder] conservative.

No doubt Mr. Souder is a scoundrel, though his forthrightness in admitting the affair and then promptly resigning are mitigating factors attesting to at least some aspect of correctly formed moral principle.

Next we turn to the Times' coverage [see, ] of a different kind of scandal, one involving lying on the part of a Senatorial candidate from Connecticut, Richard Blumenthal, who misrepresented on numerous occasions his military record, suggesting that he had served in Vietnam.

The title of the piece - written by Michael Barbaro and David M. Halbfinger - is far from as accusatory than the Souder piece, Colleague Says Blumenthal Claims Grew in Time.

The first sentence from the piece is as follows, "Former Representative Christopher Shays of Connecticut found it puzzling: over time, his friend Attorney General Richard Blumenthal kept revising how he talked about his military service..."

Please note that Christopher Shays left Congress under a cloud of scandal himself involving serious financial impropriety. In a May 30, 2009 piece [see, ] in the Connecticut Post, written by Neil Vigdor we read, Embezzlement scandal Shays Scandal May be Worse, with the lead sentence, "The embezzlement scandal that enveloped Christopher Shays' failed 2008 re-election campaign is far more extensive than has been previously reported - probably reaching back into previous Shays campaigns, the former congressman told Greenwich Time."

Perhaps the NY Times considers financial impropriety on this scale to be a resume enhancement for people it chooses to quote, at least that would justify the papers' inclusion of Shays in this piece.

Getting back to Mr. Blumenthal, who radiates all the warmth of an embalmer, the Times' coverage is mild indeed, even noting - as expiation for Blumie's actions - "There is a lot of anecdotal evidence of this phenomenon of exaggerating military service by people who feel nostalgic because they missed their war," said Brian McAllister Linn, a professor at Texas A&M University who specializes in military history."

Yes mere exaggeration, it happens all the time to non-war heroes such as Blumie.

Reading through the piece we find the only mention of Blumie's political affiliation - Democrat - hidden 9 paragraphs [and 310 words] into the piece, "At a news conference on Tuesday in West Hartford, where he was surrounded by veterans, Mr. Blumenthal, 64, a Democratic candidate for Senate, said he had never intended to mislead the public."

There is no use of the words lie or lying in the article at all, though that is clearly what happened and the way the story is constructed, Blumie's fabrication seems to be, by the Times' standards, perhaps his best qualification for high office.

So we have in these opposing presentations by the New York Times, on the same day and about similar matters of trustworthiness to serve in Congress; completely disparate and biased treatment.

There really is no new bottom line here, the old media is comprised of leftists and they unabashedly served their leftist demi-god, facts and representations be damned. Their cheerleading in print, on the air and on the 'Net is as ceaseless as it is shamelessly obvious.

The public has already tired of such ridiculous slanting of news presentations and this is reflected in falling subscriptions and viewership for the lefty press.

As the mid-term elections loom, be prepared for this to reach a crescendo which will not be abated even as the press tries to put the best face on the carnage that will be plainly on view on the morning after the voters speak. One remembers the famous Monty Python scene, "Duel in the Black Forest" where the hapless Black Knight having had three appendages chopped off by King Arthur [how do you know he is king? "he's the one who doesn't have shit all over him."] scoffs at his grievous injuries and remarks, "Let's call it a draw."

A draw indeed.

Onward...Guinevere awaits.

©2010 LLC, William Mayer. All rights reserved.