Apr
27
2013
--

Media Matters for America will never apologize about #pigford, the cowards.

I get what Legal Insurrection is doing, here, and I support it as a valid attempt to shame – but it’s not going to shame the shameless, i.e., Media Matters for America.  What it hopefully might do is help warn off people who mistakenly feel that MMFA is something else besides a deeply cynical, race-baiting group that likes to lie and scare people into supporting it.

Oh, and MMFA is made up of hypocrites.  Cowards for hiding from this story, too. But then, that’s why they’ve always been strictly B-list.  And no, I’m not going to tell you who the A-list is, either.  They’d jump for joy for the free advertising from a RedState front-pager.

Via Instapundit.

Apr
21
2012
1

Is the Department of Justice sanitizing its connection to Media Matters for America?

K, here’s the background. CJ Ciaramella is a reporter at the Washington Free Beacon, and he emailed the Department of Justice to find out if they had any response to the allegations being featured in Kate Pavlich’s latest book on the Operation Fast & Furious scandal (Fast and Furious: Barack Obama’s Bloodiest Scandal and the Shameless Cover-Up). Specifically, the allegation that there was a third gun found at the scene of Border Agent Brian Terry’s murder that could be traced back to that DOJ/DEA botched gunrunning operation; and that the existence of this third gun was being covered up in order to protect a confidential informant. And let me note in passing: I don’t care how highly-placed this alleged informant could be; his or her needs do not take precedence over the needs of Agent Terry’s surviving loved ones, or indeed the survivors of anybody that the US government helped murder by freely letting guns get illegally sold to Mexican narco-terrorists.

But let us move back to the main point: Ciaramella emailed the DoJ for their response to this issue… and the DoJ’s official response, in the form of one Office of Public Affairs spokeswoman Katie Dixon? Go read Media Matters for America (MMfA).

No, really. (more…)

Feb
13
2012
3

#rsrh Those miserable MMfA… so-and-sos.

Media Matters for America was planning to go after freaking WorldNetDaily, and not RedState?  That is a slight on my primary site’s honor, particularly since we had such an enviable track record in 2010 when it came to assisting candidates.

Then again, this does support the “David Brock is nuts” argument. (more…)

Written by in: Politics | Tags:
Jun
24
2011
--

I’m against stripping #MMFA’s tax exempt status.

Oh, they totally deserve having it stripped, of courseeven Democrats admit that Media Matters for America is a cheap strumpet for their party – but I have a pragmatic reason for being against removing their tax exempt status.  If MMfA loses its tax exempt status, it will inevitably go belly-up (nobody’s going to fund an exposed fake tax-free), so after it goes belly-up the cash currently being allocated to keeping it around will unquestionably end up going to another liberal/progressive/Democratic institution.  Given that the propensity for MMfA staffers to have both thumbs up their asses is so institutionalized that it’s now part of their dress code, this could only be an improvement for the Left.

So.  George.  Double their budget.  Or, Hell,  just give ’em big stacks of cash and have ’em burn them in a field.  It’ll save you some time, really.

Moe Lane

PS: No, seriously.  They really do suck that badly.

Written by in: Politics | Tags:
Mar
28
2011
--

#rsrh I think that Mark Hemingway is a little annoyed.

Much as I hate to cast aspersions on anyone  – “Ha!” Again I say, “Ha!” – I have my suspicions about this Weekly Standard article by Mark Hemingway on Media Matters for America, and their utter inability to move the needle on anything.  I mean, I agree that MMfA can’t, well, move the needle on anything – and, speaking as someone who writes for a political site with actual influence on domestic affairs*, I can agree with the following.

It’s actually a badge of honor among most right-leaning reporters and bloggers to have done something that they find risible.

Indeed, it is.  Still, I suspect that Mark’s just mad because the Transcendent Glorious Mind-Lords over there can’t spell his name consistently right.

Unfair?  Only superficially: this is the level of reporting that you get from MMfA, you see.  Notice that this post is not up to RedState’s front page standards, which is why it’s not there right now.

(Via Hot Air Headlines)

Moe Lane

PS: If you’re wondering why people are suddenly name-checking that website, it’s because the Secret Ascended Masters of Space-Time Itself over there got caught declaring a Crusade against Fox News, complete with infiltration squads.  We’re only human, here in the VRWC: if you present us with a rear to give a free kick to, and if you deserve to be kicked, expect a kick sudden kinetic activity…

*Like The Weekly Standard – and most assuredly not like MMfA.

Feb
15
2011
3

#rsrh Mediate making moves on Media Matters’ Money-Men?

It’s a good an explanation as any for this otherwise slightly-bizarre piece on Media Matters’ inability to move the media needle on a ‘story’ about Fox News that required the reader to simply take the unsupported word of an anonymous former Fox News employee that Bad Things Are Happening.  Left-porn, in other words: and when you look at it that way the aforementioned inability is not only not surprising at all; it almost makes one feel kind of sad and melancholy on Media Matters’ behalf.  That is, until you remember that Media Matters is a virulent Lefty shill that wants half the country to die in a fire.  Then you get over it.

But one thing that I will bring up, with malice aforethought: since when has Media Matters actually been effectual?  I mean, I’ve been in this gig since about 2003 or so; and I’ve been with RedState for over half a decade.  We move the media needle all the time.  I’ve seen it.  I’ve done it.  And in all that time, I can’t think of a single specific event where Media Matters has been the point site for ruining a conservative’s day.  And apparently, neither could Mediate: their assertion of Media Matters’ relevance is as sourced as the original Fox-bashing report that sparked the article (i.e., not at all).  That’s so… unlikely… that I actually can’t quite believe it.

So help me out, here?  Surely Media Matters has earned their corn once since they came into existence.

Moe Lane

Site by Neil Stevens | Theme by TheBuckmaker.com