Biased Propaganda at PBS

In another example of clear leftist/progressive bias in the media and one we as taxpayers actually pay for, PBS s going to air a propaganda piece called "After Tiller".
Pro-Life Group Asks Tax-Funded PBS to Cancel Film “Humanizing” Docs Who Do Third-Trimester Abortions

Brown says “After Tiller” was funded in large part by pro-abortion groups and lists Planned Parenthood and NARAL as primary outreach partners.
According to Media Impact Partners, the film’s production team’s goals include changing the view of Americans in favor of late-term abortion providers and against legislation that bans late-term abortions. The filmmakers also hope that medical students will request abortion training be made available in their curricula.

There's some "hard hitting" truth tellers right there.
PBS, along with all the other liberal/commie/progressive so called "news media" seems to forget that Kermit Gosnell is also "After Tiler" and he too preformed late term abortions. Some how I don't think that fact will make it into the documentary.
I guess it would be a little tough to humanize the butcher of Philadelphia but there's no doubt in my mind that if Planned Parenthood or NARAL could then they would have.
This how PBS uses our tax dollars and it's way past time the government defund this obvious propaganda tool of the leftist/progressive media.
Ending support of the alphabet channels is as simple as turning them off, being forced to subsidize left wing talking points by government is unacceptable.

Death by a Thousand Cuts

I read about a lot of crap that really just ticks me off to no end, so much so that sometimes I need to back away from the news feeds and do a little computer solitaire or something to clear my mind.
The stupid just becomes too painful to endure.

Take, for instance, the apparently successful media blackout of the Kermit Gosnell trial.




Good job liberal media, you're successfully covering for a mass murderer to advance your agenda of enabling more mass murder in the future. That's why people roll their eyes whenever you claim you care about the children.

Speaking of incompetent boobs, how about the judge who ordered Massachusetts to provide a sex change operation for a convicted murderer serving life in prison.

A pretty good rundown of this dirtbags crime can be read here.

Robert Kosilek: Rewarding the Man Who Murdered His Wife With a Free Sex Change Operation

First off lets just get away from the LGBT thing and consider for a moment that the guy/girl is serving life for murder, he/she committed a heinous crime against a person and society resulting in him being convicted for first degree murder. Common sense says the guy/gal pretty much abdicated his/her "rights" by depriving another of theirs.
He/she lost his/her freedom, can't vote, can't own a firearm and is told when to get up, when to eat, when to go to bed get a job buy a car and on and on.
But there is nothing cruel or unusual about getting a bed, three meals a day, shelter and not having to worry about going into debt or paying bills.....for the rest of his/her life.
All in all I'd say he/she should consider it all a wash.

If he/she hadn't committed the crime he/she was convicted of then he/she would be free to mutilate his/her body at his/her leisure.  
But since he/she is a convicted murderer his/her right to do to himself/herself what he/she pleases should be restricted to reflect the idea that he/she is being punished for depriving another human being of their life.

This should be a no brainer, he/she got himself/herself into the position he/she is in and should be made to live in it.
That's what individuals risk when they commit these kinds of acts. They lose the right to determine their own future.
That is something he/she took from his wife and it's only fair that he/she suffer the same fate.

Liberal Media BS of the Day

According to Slates Irin Carmon, being a male pretty much disqualifies me from being horrified by the murderous rampage of abortion butcher Kermit Gosnell and the silence of a derelict media.

Then she goes on to prove us wrong by providing 2 year old links to stories about the arrest of Gosnell  as proof that they've been right on top of it.

There is no Gosnell coverup

This week, the right wing has been working the refs, demanding to know why the press has been allegedly silent on the trial of Kermit Gosnell, the Philadelphia doctor who allegedly committed horrific acts against his patients with impunity for years. Fox News’ Kristen Powers kicked it off with an Op-Ed in USA Today, claiming, “The deafening silence of too much of the media, once a force for justice in America, is a disgrace.” Michelle Malkin has helped spearhead a Twitter campaign. Breitbart.com calls it “a full-blown, coordinated blackout throughout the entire national media.”And mostly, the campaign is working, generating a series of sheepish responses (and a near-instant BuzzFeed listicle). In an Atlantic piece headlined, “Why Dr. Kermit Gosnell’s trial should be a front page story,” Conor Friedersdorf admits, “Until Thursday, I wasn’t aware of this story … Had I been asked at a trivia night about the identity of Kermit Gosnell, I would’ve been stumped and helplessly guessed a green Muppet.” Slate’s Dave Weigel congratulated the tweeters for getting his attention and then filed a piece sympathetic to the coverup claim, lecturing pro-choice people that “You really should read that grand jury report,” and concluding, “Social conservatives are largely right about the Gosnell story.”

No, they aren’t right about the Gosnell story. If you’ve never heard of the Gosnell story, it’s not because of a coverup by the liberal mainstream media. It’s probably because you failed to pay attention to the copious coverage among pro-choice and feminist journalists, as well as the big news organizations, when the news first broke in 2011. There would be something rich, if it weren’t so infuriating, about these (almost uniformly male, as it happens) reporters and commentators scrambling to break open this shocking untold story. You know, the one that was written about here, here and here, to name some disparate sources.~snip~

 I suppose pointing out 2 year old stories about a trial that is happening now is supposed to elicit some kind of mea culpa on every ones part. As if that's supposed to excuse the incompetent no coverage of the trial as it goes on in real time.

But then, to insult  our intelligence, she delves into a diatribe basically blaming the pro-life movement for forcing these women to go to a butcher because access has been restricted because #1 the "gubbermint" won't pay and #2 there ain't enough clinics.

After all, the question is not just why the state failed to respond to the complaints of women and advocates who visited the clinic, although that matters hugely. It’s why women kept going there anyway: because they felt they had no alternative.~snip~

As if we are to dismiss the states responsibility to at least monitor Gosnell's clinic to ensure that it provided a legal, clean and safe environment to perform abortions. I mean I remember the whole Roe vs. Wade kerfuffle and one of the big selling points was to be able to eliminate coat hangers and dangerous "back alley" type abortions. To make them safe for "choice".
Gosnell's clinic failed miserably and so did the agencies that were supposed to provide over site.
Which means "choice" failed also which in turn means that the left wing media propaganda machine failed also.
The reason that it's not covered is because big media lied then and they ignore it now so as not to remind anyone of that.