Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News

Drudge Retort

User Info


Subscribe to jeffj's blog Subscribe


Special Features

Monday, October 17, 2016

We figured the establishment media was in the tank for Hillary Clinton. Now we know for sure, thanks to WikiLeaks. Not only are the elites supporting her candidacy, they are part of her campaign.

John Harwood writes for the New York Times, and appears on CNBC. He was a debate moderator. He reported back to Hillary's campaign on how nasty he had been to trump. They love him!

The New York Times itself allowed Hillary to veto certain quotes: if she didn't like 'em, they were out. This is the New York Times giving its coverage to a candidate, handing over the writing, while claiming fairness.

Donna Brazille told Hillary, in advance, about a question that would be asked by CNN at a town hall debate. Can you say collusion?

The Boston Globe got together with Hillary's campaign to "maximize her presence" in the paper. Where would you like to be? How can we make you more prominent?

Univision, a Spanish language station, offered campaign suggestions: Hit Trump hard they said.

TWhen I was 16, I was working in a drug store behind a counter where we sold makeup, jewelry, and watches. A man came into the store. He was scraggly, thin, wearing a faded tan T-shirt and loose gray sweatpants. He was wearing a grin, too.....

Monday, October 03, 2016

It never rains that it doesn't pour. Even as nonpartisan experts at the Government Accountability Office concluded that the Obama administration broke the law with Obamacare's reinsurance program, the Washington Post reported the administration could within weeks pay out a massive settlement to insurers through another Obamacare slush fund -- this one, risk corridors.

The Post article quoted Republicans criticizing risk corridor "bailouts." But in reality, the Obama administration itself has admitted using risk corridors as a bailout mechanism -- trying to pay insurers to offset the costs of unilateral policy changes made to get President Obama out of a political jam. These two interlinked bailouts -- one political, the other financial -- explain this administration's rush to pay off insurers on its way out the door.

Saturday, October 01, 2016

...Sandra Fluke became the centerpiece of the Democrats' "War on Women" messaging that they pounded throughout the year. The media completely ate it up, hook, line, and sinker. Within minutes, she was put on every major network and cable outlet. The media ran with stories about how women weren't allowed to testify at the hearing, even though two female college administrators -- Dr. Allison Dabbs Garrett, the senior vice-president for academic affairs at Oklahoma Christian University, and Dr. Laura Champion, medical director of Calvin College Health Services -- testified. The facts were no barrier to the headlines, which included CBS' "Dems decry all-male House panel on WH contraception rule" and CNN's "Angry lawmakers challenge lineup at hearing: ‘Where are the women?'"

Thursday, September 29, 2016

This election year has been so perpetually obtuse, we're no longer shocked by anything. In 2008, journalists abdicated their investigative roles to usher in the "inevitable" Obama presidency. Today, they're evolving further away from objectivity, and it's no surprise to see national press outlets morphing into outright fan clubs for one candidate.


Another big difference: Clinton had a strong record of evaluating and hiring women for their professional credentials. Whether you agree with his choices or not, he promoted Madeline Albright, Janet Reno, Donna Shalala, Hazel O'Leary, the economists whose names I'm forgetting, and others. Trump appears to believe that women are obligated to be ornaments instead of professionals - how does Fiorina's face, for example, have anything to do with her qualifications to be president?


Just like Bill Clinton, Trump appears to believe that certain women are worth hiring for their professional credentials, just like Bill Clinton. Also, just like Clinton, Trump seems to believe that women are also obliged to be...well, not ornaments...but, subservients instead of professionals.

how does Fiorina's face, for example, have anything to do with her qualifications to be president?

It doesn't. How does a remark pertaining to Romney, in his attempts to be inclusive, having "binders-full of women" have anything to do with his qualifications to be president?

Trump is a disgusting lout who clearly mistreats women. Bill Clinton is a disgusting lout who clearly mistreated and still mistreats women. Hillary Clinton is a disgusting human being who slandered her husbands' victims and willing mistresses for mostly partisan and cynical reasons.

Clinton supporters have very little credibility when attacking Trump on this front. Outside of drawing equivalence, Trump supporters have very little credibility drawing equivalence to the Clintons' long and sordid history of the mistreatment of women other than deflecting to obvious Clinton-hypocrisy to the nth degree.

Both of these candidates are absolutely atrocious. I can't believe how disheartening this is.

Drudge Retort

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2016 World Readable