Some will undoubtedly call me racist for assuming MSNBC’s decision to hire Sharpton was for racial reasons. But let’s be honest, the only reason anybody f*cks with Al Sharpton is for racial reasons. But the reason MSNBC’s motives are so clear is obvious. Al Sharpton is a terrible host. He’s a terrible interviewer, he can’t read a teleprompter for sh*t, and he has a failing radio show. The only reason Sharpton still has a radio show is because no one would dare cancel it. He’d scream racism and have his minions protesting with bull horns outside the station.

However, there are others who believe there’s more than phony racial diversity at work here.

From Breitbart TV:

Why would a news organization like NBC News risk further tarnishing their brand by honoring someone with this record by giving him the honor of hosting a show, especially considering he has vowednot to criticize President Obama as we enter a presidential election season?  The answer appears to be found at the highest levels of Comcast/NBC.

The Comcast/NBC merger would not have occured if not for the approval of the FCC.  One FCC commissioner, Democrat Michael Copps, voted against the merger saying that it would “erode(s) diversity, localism and competition”.  The “diversity and localism” issue is something that had been a key concern for newly appointed FCC Comissioner Mignon Clyburn when she took her position early in the Obama Administration.  And she held out her approval until she was certain that it would not be an issue.

She was swayed by a “diversity memorandum of agreement” signed by Sharpton and developed with help from his National Action Network.  Clyburn, daughter of South Carolina congressman James Clyburn, said the diversity memorandum “will serve to keep the new entity (Comcast/NBC) honest in promoting diversity.”

From The Daily Beast:

Sharpton has a long and well-documented history of leveraging his civil-rights profile for his own benefit. Grabbing a prime-time anchor spot in exchange for cheerleading for a controversial merger would be the capper on that career. It’s gone remarkably unnoticed that Sharpton was the first major black leader to endorse the Comcast merger, which met fierce resistance.

And to drive home the point about just how bad Sharpton is:

Is that the foul odor of media corruption in the air? Say it ain’t so.

Christine O’Donnell’s campaign bought air time from a TV station in Delaware for 30-minute ad spots. In other words premium advertising. She told her supporters to tune-in and watch her closing argument. The ad never aired. The TV station claims they “forgot” to air the ad.

When was the last time you heard of a TV station forgetting to air a premium ad spot? It’s what pays the bills. Sounds more like media corruption to me.

Anyway, since the corrupt bastards (to quote Sarah Palin) forgot to air the ad — we’ll air it.

We the People of the First State from Friends of Christine O’Donnell on Vimeo.

A few weeks ago a story emerged online that the feared Mexican drug gang Los Zetas had crossed the border into the US and seized two ranches in Laredo, Texas.

There seemed to be a law enforcement blackout on the subject and the local police refused to deny it happened, but would not confirm it either.

The left quickly seized the issue and made anyone who reported the story out to be cranks and racists. The story was deemed a lie cooked up by anti-illegal immigration forces.

It turns out the story wasn’t fake. It actually happened. It was only one ranch that was seized instead of two as first reported. We now have a screen shot of the police blotter outlining the incident.

Michelle Malkin says pretty much everything that needs to be said about Van Jones, his resignation, the corrupt media, and the Obama administration in her latest blog post. I don’t really have anything to add — so just read it.

-Chris Jones

This stink bomb from AFP:

Democrat Barack Obama made a rare foray to the press section of his campaign plane early Tuesday — election day — to thank reporters for accompanying him on his grueling 21-month ride.

…”But you guys have been gracious and understanding,” he said, following conservative criticism of the press for its coverage of Obama, as his plane prepared to depart after a huge rally in Virginia for Chicago.

“It’s been a good long ride with all of you,” the Illinois senator said. “Whatever happens tomorrow (Tuesday) it’s going to be extraordinary and you guys have shared this process with us.”

He certainly has plenty to thank them for. If he wins the election it won’t be because of his socialist/marxist ideas, it will be because the press did everything it could to hide his flaws.

-Chris Jones

Most Americans know the media is totally corrupt, and the refusal to cover the John Edwards scandal was the final straw. Now the mainstream media is running for cover while offering a wide range of excuses, but assuring readers that “liberal bias” had absolutely nothing to do with it — nothing at all.

I think Jennifer Rubin at Commentary Magazine said it best:

The Edwards mess is the most recent and visible, but hardly unique, example of the mainstream media’s hear no evil/see no evil approach to newsgathering. How many other stories has the MSM missed, denied or avoided? From Rathergate to Reverend Wright to the success of the surge, the pattern is the same: MSM stalls, shuffles its collective feet, and doggedly ignores information for as long as possible until they can no longer do so with a straight face. The fact that these stories without exception work to the detriment of Democrats is apparently a grand coincidence.

I don’t think the excuses are gonna hold any water with the vast majority of Americans this time. The Edwards story was a defining moment for the mainstream press and they failed miserably. Journalistic standards seem to only matter when the subject of a story happens to be a liberal Democrat.

Howard Kurtz sums up the absurdity of the MSM pretty well in his column this morning:

When critics, especially on the right, accused the media of protecting a Democrat because of liberal bias, journalists were unable to respond, because to do so would be to acknowledge the very thing they were declining to report.

Probably the most laughable excuse that continues to come up over and over again is the Elizabeth Edwards factor. The media was hesitant to cover the story out of sympathy and respect for Elizabeth Edwards given her battle with cancer.

Wow, I had no idea the media was so compassionate. When did this start? Seems a little convenient that the blood sucking vampires that make up the mainstream press had a sudden attack of conscience. The fact that John Edwards is a long time favorite of the far left is a complete coincidence — honesty, I swear.

Maybe I’m just being too cynical. When you really think about it, this sudden attack of conscience by the media may have started before the Edwards scandal. The media didn’t want to cover Rathergate out of respect for Dan Rather’s long and illustrious career. I can only assume the refusal to cover the success of the surge was out of respect for all the slain insurgents. Using the same rationale, I’m guessing that reluctance to cover Rev. Wright in the beginning was out of respect for the church.

It’s all starting to make sense now — or not.

Here’s the best excuse pieces of the day:

Howard Kurtz

L.A. Times

N.Y. Times

-Chris Jones