Another Example of Media Bias

I have to put in my two cents on the layout of the Opinion Page in the print edition for The Bulletin today July 9 2011. Someone thinks he is being oh so clever!

On either side of a fantastic letter by John McCommas are seemingly combating op-eds. I love the concept but things didnt go 'right' --pun intended.

On the left, under the banner "From the Left", is a full frontal attack on presidential candidate Michele Bachman by Richard Cohen. Fair enough except for the unsubstantiated 'she hates fags' remark. On the right side, "From the Right", is ANOTHER attack on Mrs. Bachman! In a snarky backhanded way George Will basically writes she and her staff are "not ready for prime time". Will seemed to endorse Rick Perry from the way I read it.

What the fuck? -- Just whose idea of fairness and balance is this shit??!!! How about picking a From the Right columnist who is actually FOR BACHMAN? That would be the point-counterpoint you would expect in a head to head match up but someone seems to want it both ways here. The message sent was 'The Left AND the Right agree Bachman is a loser'.

Well that is not what the polls say lately boys!

I am not a Bachman supporter yet, I am leaning towards Rick Perry in fact, but I like her a lot and clearly she is not being treated fairly by The Bulletin and this is but the latest example. Mrs. Bachman is getting the same treatment as Sarah Palin gets. What is so threatening about a conservative woman who looks like she just might be our next president or Veep?

The Bulletin did the same exact thing a while ago with abortion which is another issue they are kinda funny about. From the Left had someone who naturally is *pro-choice*, but then on the other side was Kathleen Parker. Parker's so-called From the Right perspective was great until you get to the end where she says well gosh darn it even if abortion is murder, we still shouldn't make it illegal.

I guess that is a From the Right position the editor didnt mind printing, but that is not what most Pro-Lifers think.

The Norwich Bulletin seems to be saying heads the Left wins, and tails the Right loses.

note: The mentioned op-eds did not appear in The Bulletin's online version.

Dick Blumenthal and the Croakley Factor

Well the Oracle of Norwich has spoken!

Notice how Mr. Hackett painted all the senate candidates as in dire straights except his favorite candidate Dick Blumenthal? You would almost have to think that the election will just be a formality unless you stop and think for yourself.

Mr. Hackett's wishful-thinking analysis belies the reality behind it. His candidate has the same inherent weaknesses that his counterpart Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Croakley did. Blumenthal, like Croakley, firstly just doesn't get it. They are just not one of us. Croakley and Blumenthal are slick lawyers who live in their lawyer-world that is totally detached from ours, when what we need is someone real.

What does he intend to do as senator since he cant even initiate one of his nuisance lawsuits from that perch? I think he picked the wrong year to make his move.

People are going to be asking questions that he has no foggy idea how to answer. Where is he on ObamaCare? We the People don't want it. How is he going to straddle that one?

If Blumenthal wants ObamaCare than we don't want Blumenthal. Its just that simple. Watch that 30 point he has nose-dive like Croakley's lead did when people start asking him questions (questions that the Norwich Bulletin should have already asked).

Blumenthal cant coast forever. The press has given him a free ride thus far but that is about to end.

Just as Blumenthal has a lot in common with the ill fated Croakley, I think Rob Simmons and Daria Novak have a lot of the same potential and good qualities that Scott Brown has.

Simmons and Novak are right on the issues, they are just like us and both oppose ObamaCare and oppose this reckless spending and over-printing of money.

Scott overtook a 30 point deficit and defeated Ray Hacketts candidate not by magic, not on his good looks, but because Scott was right on the issues. We don't need useless lawyers like Croakley. Blumenthal and Joe Courtney. They and people just like them are the ones that got us in this mess in the first place. We need real people to deal with real issues facing us.

I think Simmons and Novak are not only going to be contenders, I think they are going to win just like Scott Brown did.

Democrats, Media Infringe on Free Speech, Too

For The Norwich Bulletin:

The Norwich Bulletin’s selective standards on free speech’s principals strikes again! The May 23 editorial, “Good came of speech suit,” was right as far as it went, but why won’t the editorial board criticize liberal Democrats when they do the same thing?

Case in point, in 2006 state Sen. Donald Williams, D-Brooklyn, proposed a bill designed to ensure truthful campaign advertising and fight negative campaigning. Williams’ bill included speech codes, punitive fines for untrue, or misleading speech, a censorship committee and yet we didn’t hear a peep from the Bulletin. Why not?

Williams’ so called "Citizens Review Panel" would naturally be appointed by incumbents. Williams wants to invent these patronage positions to reward his supporters and further entrench Democrats in office. If ever Williams is threatened, he can use this committee as a tool to discredit any talking points against him.After all, what is misleading or untrue in politics is usually a matter of opinion.

Williams apparently doesn’t trust voters to distinguish the difference, and apparently the Bulletin silently agrees.

John R. McCommas
Willimantic

More Bulletin Budgetary Bullshit

Wednesday's Norwich Bulletin's editorial [Griswold voters have opportunity to open dialogue] proves once and for all that either they don't just don't get it, or they think very little of our collective intelligence.

My money is on the latter...

The rest of us know that Griswold voters vetoed the board of education and town budgets because they were unaffordable. Griswold is hardly alone. Swollen budgets went down in flames all over Eastern Connecticut including here in Windham and Killingly.

The editorial on the other hand says "Taxpayers are sending a very clear message: They want accountability. The taxpayers action should not be viewed as a negative, a movement towards forcing the town to make large spending cuts or a demand for lower taxes".

Just exactly what, I wonder, would convince the editorial board that we really really really want lower taxes? How clear must we be before it sinks in? Maybe sky writing?

This is the part that made me queasy: Town officials and taxpayers need to have an "honest and frank discussion about the issues and concerns of taxpayers".

--- Then we all have a quick group hug, we will approve the budgets with minuscule cuts, and its back to spending money like drunken sailors. You know, once the tax-n-spend liberals have carefully explained to us ignorant surfs why the government can't do without the tax increases and why last year's increases just won't do. Contrary to what the Bulletin pretends to purport, they are really only advocating one-way communication.

The editorial takes an attitude that Griswold taxpayers had a "temper tantrum" just as the late Perter Jennings characterized the 1994 midterm elections when Republicans took over Congress:

"Some thoughts on those angry voters. Ask parents of any two-year-old and they can tell you about those temper tantrums: the stomping feet, the rolling eyes, the screaming. Imagine a nation full of uncontrolled two-year-old rage. The voters had a temper tantrum last week....Parenting and governing don’t have to be dirty words: the nation can’t be run by an angry two-year-old."

It's just un-imaginable to liberals that conservatives might win a few battles here and there. It's un-thinkable that we should actually win majorities, that voters may want tax cuts and cuts in spending. When it does happen it is characterized as some sort of mistake or misunderstanding.

It might crack the very foundation of the Norwich Bulletin's political philosophy to admit that some towns this year have actually produced budgets with no tax increases on the first try. Yes it can be done without draconian measures but you won't read any quotes from these towns in the Bulletin.

No way Jose. The Norwich Blunder is squarely in the camp of the public employee unions --- greedy pigs at the trough. OINK OINK!

Choices have to be made and reality-defying liberals both in the press and in the government have to come to terms with the fact they can't have all they want, all the time. This year they will have to tell the unions "NO" to some of those items on their wish lists.

Contrary to what Mr. Jennings thought and the Norwich Bulletin editorial board still thinks, those of us paying the bills are ultimately Mom and Dad -- not them.

And what WE say GOES.

Boycott the Norwich Bulletin?

Here is a new website that is worth looking at. I used to be a news junky. Back in the 1980's when I was stationed in Mayport Florida, I absorbed three papers a day. I could not get enough. These days on my way to work I whiz right by the Norwich Bulletin box I used to buy from. I have become not only discouraged by the news but by the slanted reporting. I still look at the Bulletin from time to time but our love affair is over.


The following is from this new website's "Why Boycott the Norwich Bulletin".

For years the Norwich Bulletin was the hometown newspaper for Windham and New London counties, we have watched how their left leaning ideology has snaked its way into how they view the world and the surrounding communities they are supposed to represent.
Many of us have become tired of the biased news and opinions of the Norwich Bulletin editors and many of it’s reporters. Their half truths, their propaganda, their spin and their lack of reporting both sides of every story has become legend in this region of Connecticut. They are well known for their editing of major points and facts in the submitted letters to the editor, sometimes rendering the authors point useless or making the entire letter the opposite of it’s original meaning. Many of us have cancelled our subscriptions and our hope is to urge more people to cancel their subscriptions until they can become a more balanced source of news. Let the free markets decide if this company is to survive because they appear to be alienating at least half of it’s customers.
We had hoped that when Gatehouse Media took new ownership of the Norwich Bulletin that they would have cleaned house (so to speak) and started fresh with a more evenly balanced group of publishers, editors, and reporters, but that hasn’t happened and until it does, most of us will continue our boycott.
We have a blog area for each town that the Norwich Bulletin covers and if anyone is interested in adding to the news that the Norwich Bulletin leaves out your town, please contact the administrator at admin@boycottnorwichbulletin.com and pending approval, we’ll get you registered as a blogger. We do ask that only facts as you know them will be posted, we also ask our readers to not post any vulgar or attack type comments because they will be deleted.
The comment section is for comments from boycottnorwichbulletin community of readers. Don’t assume that that the administrators agree with or endorse any particular comment just because it’s left to stand in the comment section. We are not responsible for the comments of our posters.
Anyone who fails to comply with the terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege. We also request that you read the Bloggers’ FAQ - Online Defamation Law
We also have had numerous e-mails asking for a list of the Norwich Bulletins advertisers so our readers can contact them to let them know how dissatisfied they are that they would advertise their business with such a unfair and biased newspaper. Here is the list, along with the contact name, number or email. Feel free to boycott them also.