The Pardu

The Pardu
Watchful eyes and ears feed the brain, thus nourishing the brain cells.
Showing posts with label ABC. Show all posts
Showing posts with label ABC. Show all posts

Sunday, June 16, 2019

As Trump's World Turns: When The Polls Don't LIe; FIre The Pollsters

Image result for abc news trump

Watch at the 1:00-minute mark. Trump with ABC's George Stephanopoulos. After Trump's internal pollings numbers were leak showing he is training Joe Biden in all states, Trump plays the "Lie Card" Actually, he went off the record in the interviews an ordered a call to someone on his tea with a request for polling numbers. You will notice the cameras do not return to the limo interview. Or, is his behavior best represented by the word delusional?" 
"I don't believe those polls. There's no way [former Vice President Joe Biden] beats me in Texas," Trump told ABC News Chief Anchor George Stephanopoulos on Tuesday during an exclusive interview. "No, my polls show that I'm winning everywhere."
ABC's piece report Trump continued with his diatribe response to the point of using the "T" word (truth). There isn't a person in industrialized Earth who doesn't know that Trump is absent the ability, to tell the truth. (Washington Post April 2019)
"Nobody showed you those polls because those polls don't exist, George. Those polls don't exist. I'm losing in 15 out of 17 states? Those polls don't exist," Trump said. "I just was given a meeting with my pollster who I frankly don't even believe in pollsters if you want to know the truth, you just run a campaign and whatever it is, it is, but I just had a meeting with somebody that's a pollster and I'm winning everywhere, so I don't know what you're talking about."

On June 10th, 2019 The New York Times reported Trump knew was formed of the polling data and instructed his staff to deny the numbers.  

After working through the proceeding, you have to know what comes next.  Trump fired the pollsters. Crooks And Liars.

Friday, April 18, 2014

Tax Policy, The GOP, And You.... Part II

On April 15th (Tax Day) Fox News managers and producers broadcast a segment that smacks the face and psyche of Americans who understand and abhor income inequity born of GOP economic policy since the early 1980s.  Take a look at Ed Schultz's "Vulture Chart."  Do you notice the red (upper income) trend line took off in the early 1980s? 

Now, for Fox New's Hemmer and Varney.  Hemmer actually comments the about down sides of taxes (granted non of us care for taxes), and regulation. The host is big with mantra and talking points, but he should consider use of the word "regulation" as we consider our recent history of unregulated capitalism.

The segment speaks without any opaqueness about the Fox News audience.  

Income inequality is (excuse the colloquial phrase) "as serious as contracting cancer." Those of us who earn significantly less than the nation's top income earners are literally relegated to equally significantly shorter life-spans. Talking Points Memo published a piece today, with "death charts" illustrating the stark reality of "income privilege" Vs. the the less expanded life span. 

The stark reality....

The Curry County Democrats
A Giant Statistical Round-Up of the Income Inequality Crisis in 16 Charts
The Atlantic, Derek Thompson
To understand the full story, you have to look at capital income — from assets like housing and stocks and bonds. This is where income growth for the top 1% has positively exploded, taking income inequality to record highs.

The chart, one of 16 in the Atlantic piece, provides an irrefutable illustration of income inequality. The also takes GOP and conservative mantra to the point of comical manipulation. The only problem with the comedic blabbering from the Right: People are not  paying attention. When we fail to pay attention to our growing oligarchy and growing income inequality, it simply grows and metastasizes. 

Growing income inequality should rightfully, lead to higher income tax burden for people at the top of the income strata. Conversely, middle income Americans and lower income Americans should rightfully pay lower federal taxes. We do have a progressive tax structure! 

It is interesting to watch how right-wing media runs interference for people who provide potential for contributions and funding, and does so without regard for people who earn less and are earning less on an ever-increasing basis.

While the Wall Street Journal recently published the following graphic, SLATE very adroitly dealt with the graphic message. Thus placing interpretation of the graphic along-side Right-wing false interpretation of data reality.

Excerpt (read carefully)
There is nothing wrong with having that debate—most liberals, I think, welcome it. There is something very wrong, however, with how the Journal presents America’s shifting tax burden, which it traces in the graph below. The chart is supposed to tell us that the entire top 20 percent of households—the group shown in red, which includes “couples with two children making more than $150,000,” as writer John McKinnon puts it—is now responsible for paying a vastly larger share of all federal taxes than it was at the start of the Reagan era. It’s not just the ultra-rich who are doing the heavy lifting. It’s the upper-middle class, too.
That is only true if you lump together the top 1 percent with the next 19 percent of taxpayers. Break them apart (as I’ve done below, using the same data sets as the Journal), and it’s clear that the only cohort responsible for a notably larger share of the country’s tax bill is the top 1 percent. (The graph includes a break where it shifts from Congressional Budget Office data, which ends in 2010, to figures from the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center).

If you only look at federal income tax liability—so no payroll taxes or corporate taxes—then the entire top 10 percent has seen its share of the burden grow quite a bit. But that brings us to the bigger point: Income inequality is rising. And as long as we have progressive taxation, that means the rich will naturally pay a larger share of the tax tab. The Journal, to its credit, acknowledges this. What it fails to point out is that, according to both the Congressional Budget Office and Tax Policy Center, only one group is paying a higher average tax rate than it did during the Bush era. Again, that’s the top 1 percent.
Right-wing media knows its viewers and ultimately knows who pay their "freight."  

MSNBC's Alex Wagner, Ezra Klein and Janell Ross, The National Journal, discussed the American tax experience.

The average American knows the wealthy have a form of conferred privilege. They have such singularly due to their wealth and opportunity inherent in wealth.  We also know the average American has enough tax knowledge to know that wealthy pay the progressive tax and they know the progressive rates mean we pay less.  Ah yes, the voting public and the non-voting public have some knowledge of the progressive tax, the public has no information feeds that provide easy to find relational perspectives.

Also on Tax Day Media Matters published a piece among pieces that addressed the information void and the lack of information dissemination via network news (ABC, NBC, CBS). 
Relationship Between Income Tax Rates And Income Inequality

If as indicated by both Gallup and Pew Research, Americans get their news from television, and the three major networks didn't provide coverage of the relationship between taxes and income inequality over the course of the past year, one should ask why? The rational person should think in terms of how can public opinion focus on issues critical to matters of importance to the non-wealthy, if media shone such issues.  

Now, do you think media inadvertently avoids issues of growing income disparity?  Surely, you wouldn't be so naive.

Friday, February 7, 2014

US Senate Votes Against Extending Unemployment Insurance; No Mainstream Network Covers The Vote!

In the shadows on some issues.  Why?
Media Matters continues to nail  the extent to which electronic media seeks ratings. How could it be the US Senate denial of unemployment insurance payments (even for three months retroactive back to last December, 28th) did not garner one second of coverage on network news?  

The failure to mention the Senate vote, is particularly striking since across the political spectrum (Democrats, Independent and Republican) Americans favor extending the payments. Of course, favoring the extension tails off once you look at favorable data from Republicans. Nonetheless, all favor extending the payments.

According to a Quinnipiac University survey, 58% of registered voters nationwide say they favor a three-month extension of the benefits for people currently out of work. 
The poll, which was released Wednesday, indicates a partisan divide, with overwhelming support from Democrats (83%-13%), majority backing from independents (54%-41%), and opposition from Republicans by a 54%-42% margin.
 The fact that not one mainstream network even mentioned the US Senate vote, speaks volumes about news producers and managers. If the data above is accurate and Quinnipiac has a reputation for accuracy with a progressive slant what you are about to see can only be attributed to ratings aversion. Are these networks avoiding issues that might 'turn-off" right-wing politicians. How is it so coincidental all three ignored a vote that may have you sitting at home with no income? The only answer is to avoid shame for the GOP and the prospect of Right-wing backlash from entities in DC. Let's face facts, the issue is an issue of interest to the public.

Broadcast News

See Media Matters here.

One more look at the shame of major network news.

Causes of Economic Harm

Yes, for a moment we digress away for the foibles and politics of network news managers and producers.  We simply cannot resist a snapshot of how FOXPEN (Fox Propaganda and Entertainment Network) covers another issue that impacts perception of the political Right.

Chris Christe Anyone?
Media Matters Chart: Mentions of Chris Christie on Cable News

People who are unaware of current events and issues critical to the nation, make bad choices.

What happens to the (common) people who do not earn millions per year (as do many broadcasters) when people vote the nation into political "OOOPs"; like electing George W. Bush twice. 


Saturday, December 7, 2013

US Media: Broadcasters For The Right and Serves As Mind-shapers


If you are a progressive, liberal, or open-minded Independent, you may have noticed television media (news Media) is joining AM Radio as the domain of American Conservatism.

From Fox News through ABC News the year has been bursting at the seems with broadcast that were not only in error, the broadcast appeared have been developed to beat other networks to the airways.  When television media reaches for races to broadcast they do not fulfill a basic journalism standard: Verify story and double check sources. Of course, we exclude Fox News from the latter as that network is an obvious outlet for Right-wing propaganda and servers well as a communication division form the GOP.  We do not expect stories  with any intent other than erosion  of the Obama Administration policy, and practice.   We have to only consider the 60 Minutes debacle, the ABC Benghazi email screw-up, and 

While not an established corporate media outlets, checkout this headline....

CBS News May Drop Benghazi Bomb On Obama - Free Republic

Other than Fox News, corporate media other than would never publish nor broadcast with a headline like the headline above. Of course, the 60 Minutes Benghazi report was of "Dropping the Bomb."

The Global Movement Dot Info, published a detail piece related to the extent of consolidation of US media since 1999. 


Larger Version: Click

Am ugly picture!  We understand cronyism and uber wealth plutocrats. It is impossible to imagine the Kochs and ultra conservative like the Kochs do not have cronies at the highest level of the Boards of the six media conglomerates. 

It shouldn't take much convincing for anyone to realize any industry with few corporate families have opportunity to shape US policy as much as any elected administration. Since, corporations have fiduciary responsibility to earn revenues and subsequent profits, along with CEO commitment to fulfill HIS multi-million dollar contracts, can we convince you can six corporate leaders and their Boards of Directors can act as mind-shapers.

If you are not yet convinced, keep in mind Both Gallup and Pew Research have reported survey results indicating we get our news from television. Did you notice that Fox News ranked highest in viewership according to the Gallup poll? We suggest that is a perilous thought. Fox doesn't broadcast news! The network broadcasts right-wing propaganda and is some cases (O'Reilly Hannity and Meghan Kelly) stories are fabricated or developed without total commitment to ethics.

If we consider the number of apologies, retractions, and Fox News fake story "busts" since the Democrats won the White House in 2008, our posit isn't a stretch. Actually, our posit is existential. The reasonable person would have thought the  Bush Years was a primer for a strong Left media lean.  Media never collectively leans Left.

The FaceBook Page FORWARD published a detailed review of what they called "Media Fail." 


How Disinformation Has Become The Norm

The vast majority of the American media is owned & controlled by corporations. 

Corporations now more than ever are using the media to shape public opinion. 

In this age of reality TV & shock entertainment Americans have become desensitized. 

Thus the same Republican Party that ruined the economy…

Murdered nearly a million people with their lies…

And literally robbed the tax payers blind.

Have been allowed to openly sabotage & smear the President for five years. Without being called out on their rank hypocrisy. 

Republican’s brazenness comes from their faith. Yes faith in the enormous propaganda machine they have created.

Be sure & like our page to receive all of our latest memes & updates.
Images with an exception for FORWARD meme, from The Global Movement Dot Info


Saturday, September 7, 2013

Peggy Noonan: Punditry Gone Rancid! Jon Stewart On Noonan (Video)

Ms. Sunday Morning Peggy Noonan has yet again given us a reminder of the failings of her punditry. Sunday Morning News shows have long provided viewing I can do without. Yet, I find myself sticking on NBC, ABC, or CBS for a few errant minutes some Sundays. 

I literally cringe every time something in me forces watching either of the news shows. It is like knowing I should not scratch that scab off the nasty scratch on my arm.  You know it is not the right thing to do, but you do it anyway. 

First, network television Sunday morning news shows are the unquestioned domain of the socio/political Right. NBC placed "Mr. Conservative" David Gregory squarely in a seat vacated via the premature death of Tim Russert. George will is as much a fixture on Sundays as Peggy Noonan.  NBC more than frequently books Peggy Noonan. Even minutes of viewing (watching and listening) Noonan,  I suffer what can be described as crawling epidermis.

Anyone who views the pundit expects a conservative performance that not only satisfies those with Obama Derangement Syndrome, the viewer gets much more. Her performances also entertain those who may relish unbridled pompousness and gloating elitism. She visits the set with what appears pre-rehearsed non-verbals, strategic hair flipping, and facial expression fit for a person in need of a laxative. She is over-the-top demonstrative to the point of appearing self-aggrandizing.  

Let's face it television is a visual media well before it is an auditory media. You have to look the part, correct?   Now for an example of punditry gone absolutely mad. Noonan's posit in the embedded is based on a piece she wrote about the 2011 debt ceiling debacle. As you watch the over-the-top exhibition with contrived demeanor, think about the 2011 debt ceiling battle. It was the very debt battle that led to Standard and Poor's lowering the US Credit Rating to Double AA (down from AAA). It was the debacle after which Boehner proclaimed "I got 98% of what I wanted."  It was the battle during which President Obama stood-up for not giving-in to cuts to entitlement programs and social services while asking for a meager increase in tax revenue. Yet, then and now we have Republicans practicing their consistent talking point of: "The president does not lead."  Watch as Noonan provided her rendition of "he does not lead."

While it is a dated exhibition, it serves well in showing the competency of Noonan's punditry. The pundit gloated and piled it on as President Obama stood tall for the lower and middle income strata while seeking a tax increase.

Pundits are booked on news shows based on their abilities to opine and to partake in oral exchanges with point-retort-counterpoint dynamics. I cannot recall a pundit who fails at that set of skills regardless of Left or Right lean. Of course, I exclude Sarah Palin as I used the words "point-retort-counterpoint." Palin is a Fox News whine her up and let her talk. Give her a three minute introductory-quasi question and have a cup of coffee while she spills drivel across the airways. So, let's exclude the former Governor of Alaska. It was Alaska was it not?
Noonan is supposedly competent at a much more visceral level, despite being frequently way off-base in her on-air opining. The Wall Street Journal (WSJ) writer recently posted on the Syria debate in the United States. One would think, a pundit who writes for Murdoch's WSJ, and who is on Sunday News shows almost weekly, would be much more conscience of the state of war in Syria. Note the highlighted sentence in the following embed.  
Embedded image permalink
How could the pundit not have total mastery of the fact the war in Syria has been underway for two years and is a "civil war."

In 2008, Noonan showed her mantle with an obviously contrived and phony analysis as she declared Palin as winner of the Vice Presidential Debate. Factually, Palin's performance was sad and pathetic. Noonan went oozy from the moment Palin stepped out on stage. Is that the level of shallowness one should expect from a highly compensated right-wing pundit? Well, yes it is exactly since her mission was to laud all things conservative throughout the campaign.

Watch Palin's shallowness, pre-programmed and phony. Lest we forget sexist performance! Is it playing-up one's gender to eye-wink in a national debate? What from Palin and her handlers would lead to the placing their perception of Palin as "cute" and sexy (eye-winks) over qualified and competent for high office.  OK, If her look is (was) your preference, then help me belatedly understand the significance of an obvious gender based ploy in a critical campaign debate?   Actually, it was crass and disappointingly shallow.  Yet, another quick look at stupid and shallow. 

Let's place Noonan's Palin debate oozing in perspective to complete ejaculation from Pat Buchanan.  "The most attractive candidate out there."  What???? Fortunately, we did not suffer the horror of Sarah Palin and John McCain within operational distance of the White House, so Buchanan's "attractive," was as irrelevant as it was a shallow manifestation of his aged libido.  

As we considered Palin's contribution to the campaign ticket over the long haul it is easy to recognize fallacy of Noonan's punditry. Palin was without doubt the most incompetent candidate for high political office ever. Yet, both Noonan and Buchanan fulfilled their roles without flinching.

Punditry in the face of a landslide defeat: 

Trying her best to make the IRS issue a real scandal as prescribed by all during the late spring: linked.

Meet The Press exposure of Noonan's punditry via the Majority report FM: linked.