Why don’t U.S. Newspapers, along with other media outlets (TV, radio, Internet, etc.), ever promote “THE TRUTH” in its Front Page coverage anymore?

New York Post, front page, 5-19-22

$64,000 Question: Why can’t great daily Newspapers of about 25 years ago — like the Boston Globe, NH Union-Leader, or even, the Lowell Sun — ever publish on its Front Page, THE TRUTH OF WHAT’S REALLY HAPPENING RIGHT NOW IN AMERICA!!!

Ya know, sort of like the New York Post did in its publication this morning. Instead, we get all these once great newspapers tell us day-after-day, year-after-year that these BLATANT LIES like that Joe Biden is the “greatest President in U.S. History”, when truth be told, nothing could be further from the truth!!!

#FakeNews

Does Boston Globe writer Corey Gottlieb realize that Michael Sam sucks at pro football or is he just an imbecile?

Boston Globe writer Corey Gottlieb

(Why does one of the largest – and supposedly most respected – newspapers in the country allow such a brain-dead moron like staff writer Corey Gottlieb to publish an editorial on something he knows little-to-nothing about?

Earth-to-Corey: Michael Sam was picked in the 7th – and LAST – round of this year’s National Football League’s player draft. The reason Sam wasn’t drafted in one of the earlier rounds is because – he ain’t that good as far as pro football goes. Most, if not all, of the other college football players who were drafted in this year’s 7th Round were probably cut by their respected NFL teams as well – NOT because of their sexual orientation, Corey, but because they weren’t THAT good.

Secondly, how the hell is Massachusetts – especially the Boston area – on the same plateau with Alabama, Mississippi, and Texas when it comes to Gay and Lesbian Rights and Acceptance??? Correct me if I’m wrong, but I believe Massachusetts was the very FIRST state in the country to allow “civil unions” or marriages between Gay and Lesbian couples. In Massachusetts political elections, for example, being Gay or Lesbian doesn’t seem to a major problem for a candidate getting elected – if you don’t believe me, just ask former U.S. Reps Barney Frank or Gerry Studds what I’m talking about.

So how the heck would a high-profile gay athlete playing on a local professional sports team improve the attitudes of most of the people in Boston 180 degrees on Gay and Lesbian Acceptance? In fact, if Sam should land a roster spot on his current NFL team – the Dallas Cowboys – I think the influence Mr. Gottlieb is stating this player would bring to Boston would be much more beneficial to Texas, and that region of the country, than it would be here.)

http://www.boston.com/sports/football/patriots/2014/09/03/michael-sam-could-have-changed-everything-boston/3uQsHs6s9YhJKGMqnH5MgP/story.html?p1=Topofpage:Carousel_lead_headline

Michael Sam Could Have Changed Everything in Boston

By Corey Gottlieb
Boston.com Staff
September 3, 2014 — 3:17 PM

I am not a gay man.

I haven’t walked a day in Michael Sam’s shoes. I couldn’t tell you what it feels like to be him—to be the most hyperbolic version of different.

What I am, instead, is a straight white man who grew up outside of Boston and bounced from one pocket of privilege to another – from Brookline to Cambridge to the South End, each a trendier version of the same homogenous landscape. In turn, I’ve spent the majority of my life in locker rooms where dudes count their conquests in bathroom-stall Sharpie and say ‘faggot’ every time they feel awkward.

Michael Sam could have changed that.

This isn’t to say that I haven’t also seen progress. From the perspective of tangible change and increased tolerance, my generation is historic. That my high school graduation coincided almost to the day with the passing of same-sex marriage in Massachusetts was neither symbolically insignificant nor ignored by kids my age. This is not the Boston of busing past.

At least, not on the surface. There is a gap, though, between the intensely liberal values that have become synonymous with Massachusetts and the culture that is most pervasive among this state’s young men.

Maybe it’s a prep school thing. Maybe it’s our fathers, our uncles, our coaches. Maybe it’s the vestiges of an Irish-Catholic community that fought tooth and nail to survive a century of poverty.

Regardless, it is. We don’t do tolerance well. We talk about it and maybe even believe in it, but often our own insecurities ultimately prevent us from truly enforcing it among one another.

Michael Sam could have changed that.

In a city whose lifeblood is sports, the first gay male professional athlete could have been as powerful as the mayor. There is no conversation here that doesn’t start and end with our teams and our players – say what you will about New York, but this is the most excitable, most embattled, most in-love-with-her-no-matter-how-crazy-she-drives-me sports town in the world. Period.

The Patriots could have changed all that.

The divide between us-in-locker-rooms and us-on-paper might have been bridged incomparably had the Patriots swooped in and signed Michael Sam after he was cut by the St. Louis Rams this past weekend, and before the Cowboys had a chance to scoop him up Wednesday.

Like it or not, the current role models for Boston’s young men are either as alpha-dog as they come (read: GQ posterboy, husband to world’s most celebrated supermodel), as salt-of-the-earth as they come (read: Red Sox captain who redefined the term ‘dirt dog’) or as aloof and emotionally disinterested as they come (read: Rajon Rondo). They seem like good enough men, and we could do far worse than to have our sons emulate them. But they do not inspire change.

We need immersion by force. We are past the point of conversations or even education. Stop by the mandatory preseason diversity seminar at a high school football team’s summer session in Brookline or Dedham or Walpole or Everett and I guarantee you’ll see a bunch of kids cracking jokes as a coach rolls his eyes.

How could Michael Sam have changed all that?

You can’t simply stick an openly gay player in a Pats uniform and expect open arms from the young men of Boston who’ve long cracked the same jokes.

The first wave of press and the initial ripples would have done little to nothing, except perhaps stir up a little drama.

For a little while, we would all have stood and watched.

And then we’d get over it, and that is what would’ve made a difference. The normalcy. Not the first Michael Sam tackle or the first Michael Sam penalty, but the fifteenth time Vince Wilfork bear-hugged Michael Sam and none of us noticed. The hundredth photo of the team doing walk-throughs when our first instinct stopped being to spot Sam and check, against our own better judgment, if somehow he ‘looks different’ when he plays. The quiet dropoff in buzz the second and third years when Sam reported back to training camp. The way, little by little, we all stopped caring about anything other than the game, the team.

Our team.

What Boston needs is less Sam’s bravery than his mortality. Not a name, not a celebrity, just a person. A man who laughs and gets hurt and makes mistakes and gets fired up – a man who happens to be gay, but whose gayness is a waning element of how we, as men, identify him. And that regular man needs to exist among a group of regular men—what our teenagers need is less a single hero than a collective social picture that looks a whole lot like theirs.

That’s it right there – that’s our best shot at cracking the hyper self-protective exterior of every 13-year-old kid who’s watched his brother throw touchdowns at Roxbury Latin and date pretty girls from Dana Hall. Show him 53 of the toughest, manliest guys in Boston and let him gradually forget that one of them is different. Get him to the point where ‘noticing’ the gay guy doesn’t make sense anymore, because why should it matter to him if it doesn’t matter to them? Make him see, through them, that it’s not a big deal.

It wouldn’t have changed everything, that’s for sure. But to find the single thread that connects every conversation among the men in this town, to grab Boston’s indisputable social equalizer and infuse in it a visible example of see-this-wasn’t-such-a-big-deal acceptance – that could have begun to make a difference.

Michael Sam could have been that. I wish he had been.

Could Boston Globe columnist Tom Keane win ‘Biggest Douche-Bag in 2014’ award? He’s definitely got my vote

Boston Globe columnist Tom Keane

(Point of Disclosure: Nobody picked me to do this ALS Ice Bucket Challenge, but if they had, I probably would’ve volunteered to go through with it — especially on a sweltering hot 90-plus degree afternoon we’ve had in the past couple weeks.

This Boston Globe columnist, Tom Keane is truly a Douche Bag, along with a first-class BLEEP-hole, in every sense of the term. As with President Barack Obama, nobody’s “forcing” you to actually go through and have somebody dump a bucket of ice water over your head, nor is anybody “forcing” you to donate any money if you really don’t want to. Who the hell is Tom Keane to proclaim that this is an idea “best not repeated”? Especially on the week before, what would’ve been, Jerry Lewis’ annual Muscular Dystrophy Labor Day telethon.

Earlier this week, Boston radio talk show hosts on WEEI, John Dennis and Gerry Callahan tried to call Mr. Keane at the Globe hoping for an on-air interview regarding his latest column, only to be told by one of his Globe colleagues that Keane was “traveling”. Traveling??? So this pompous, arrogant Douche Bag can’t even use his cell phone to call into a radio station from an airport or a vacation spot and try to defend the integrity of his viewpoint? Tom Keane truly is a blatant Douche Bag!

Incidentally, it was actually Dennis and Callahan, not I, who suggested on-air, that Mr. Keane should now be awarded “Douche Bag of the Year”, despite the fact that there are still four more months left in 2014.)

http://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2014/08/24/ice-bucket-challenge-gimmick-best-not-repeated/8AMRgZVtCBKyvU7RSX1whN/story.html?p1=ArticleTab_Article_

Ice Bucket Challenge a gimmick best not repeated

By Tom Keane
Globe Columnist — August 24, 2014

Good for Barack Obama. While vacationing on Martha’s Vineyard, he refused Ethel Kennedy’s ice bucket challenge. You know the saying: Just because every idiot in the world is jumping off of a cliff doesn’t mean you should too. No question, the group-think summertime craze is proving an effective way to raise funds. But that doesn’t make it right.

The challenge, as you’re probably aware, is that someone dares you either to douse yourself with a bucket full of water and ice or send $100 to the ALS Association. Dares, I’ve always thought, bring out the worst in people.

“Eat this earthworm.”

“No, of course not.”

“I dare you to eat this earthworm.”

“OK.”

In this case, the worst has been brought out in droves. George W., Charlie Sheen, and Oprah are only a few of the luminaries who have all posted videos showing themselves getting soaked, as have tens of thousands of ordinary folks. Why? The humiliation of getting wet, apparently, is better than having to cut a big check (although to be fair, many get doused and donate anyway). Or perhaps it’s that, celebrity and non-celebrity alike, people crave attention, likes, and hits so much that they’ll do most anything.

For his part, Obama said he’d give instead. If you’re going to play the game, I guess, that’s the right approach. And a lot of people must agree. The ALS Association — the acronym stands for amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, better known as Lou Gehrig’s disease — didn’t invent the concept of the challenge but surely is delighted someone did. Since the fad began, the association says it’s seen $41.8 million in contributions — a big jump from a paltry $2.1 million in the same period last year.

Meanwhile, big disease advocates such as the American Lung Association, the American Cancer Society, and the Alzheimer’s Association must be eyeing the challenge with envy, marveling not only at the ALS Association’s growing bank account but also the publicity it’s garnered. Are there to be future ice bucket challenges for them? Or perhaps variations on the theme — the hot wax challenge, maybe? The prospect of third-degree burns might prove even more effective than cold water.

And, one has to ask, why the focus on ALS? According to the Centers for Disease Control, far more people die each year from heart disease (596,577 in 2011), cancer (576,691) or Alzheimer’s (84,974) than ALS (perhaps 5,600). But somehow, the ALS Association is now the charity du jour, benefitting from a clever idea that went viral. And that, unfortunately, illustrates the real problem all good causes face: getting people to notice them.

You would think the merits of something — eradicating a disease, educating the impoverished, or cleaning up the environment — would be enough to move people to be altruistic. But that’s rarely the case. Every charity somehow needs to break through the clutter of competing pleas. For big donors, that means one-on-one appeals. For smaller donors, group activities seem to work.

Some have criticized the Challenge as slacktivism, as if the millennial generation was somehow uniquely trying to get away with doing as little as possible. But slacking off is an age-old phenomenon and non-profits, knowing that, have learned to dress up their appeals as something else. Thus they hold grand banquets, the purpose of which is to figure out how to get people to pay more for a meal than it actually costs. So too, we’ve seen a proliferation of runs, walks, and rides — the Walk for Hunger, the Jingle Bell Run (for arthritis), or the Pan-Mass Challenge (cancer). Mass perambulation is largely unconnected to any of these causes, of course, but for some reason is an effective way to get people to start giving.

The ice bucket challenge follows these antecedents but adds a new and troubling twist. Charities have always been comfortable using guilt as a motivator — children and puppies in danger seem to work especially well. But the challenge crosses a line. Those issuing challenges are not only telling others what cause to support but also saying that if they don’t, they must suffer a penalty. Threats to compel giving? It seems the opposite of what it really means to be charitable.

Disgraceful Boston Globe aims to make U.S. feel guilty over Marathon terrorist attack

Alleged Boston Marathon bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev

Boston Globe writer Gish Jen

[What an utter and total disgrace for the Boston Globe — in a vain attempt to make its readership, a.k.a. American citizens, feel guilty over its treatment of Muslim terrorists’ scumbags, like Dzhokhar and Tamerlan Tsarnaev, a.k.a. the Boston Marathon bombers. Apparently, The Globe initiated this commentary when the Boston Red Sox started off its World Series victory parade last weekend and made speeches at the official finish line of the BostonMarathon. To throw even more gasoline on the proverbial fire, Red Sox owner John Henry also owns the Boston Globe — can you say, “conflict of interest”?]

http://bostonherald.com/news_opinion/columnists/howie_carr/2013/11/carr_globe_should_open_its_eyes

Carr: Globe should ‘open’ its eyes

Tuesday, November 5, 2013

By:  Howie Carr

The Boston Globe  — meet the new boss, same as the old boss.

Just days after buying the wreckage on Morrissey Boulevard at a fire-sale price, the new owner John Henry prints a shockingly ignorant, tone-deaf piece mourning the treatment of the greedy Muslim welfare terrorists who destroyed the Boston Marathon.

And Henry, who also owns the Red Sox, allowed the terrorist apologia to run on the very day after his team commemorates both its World Series triumph and the victims of last spring’s Islamist massacre.

Someone named Gish Jen, or is it Jen Gish, wrote the following about the political “refugees” who repaid the generosity of the American people by slaughtering them:

“Did we fail the Tsarnaevs somehow? It’s not clear that we did.”

No, but it is clear they failed us. Nobody asked them to come here and immediately go on welfare, for a decade or more. They claimed they were being oppressed in the Third World hellhole whence they came. The Tsarnaevs were so oppressed they often returned to vacation there for months at a time.

Money — never a problem for the Tsarnaevs, even though none of them ever really had a job, unless you include the kid brother’s drug dealing.

“Yet for people who knew Dzhokhar especially, who had seen him at school, who had studied and partied and played sports with him, the lurking fear has been that we failed to truly open our hearts, that we accepted him, but only up to a point.”

We certainly opened our wallets. Here is what we know about their welfare bonanza — EBT cards with food stamps and cash, Section 8 housing, Mass Health, WIC, college scholarships, likely SSI (though the Obama administration has dummied up — as a professional courtesy).

And how did they repay us? Sister is arrested for shoplifting in Dorchester. Mom is arrested for shoplifting in Natick. Sister-in-law is arrested for shoplifting in Rhode Island. Apparently they learned to pick our merchandise a lot faster than they picked up our language.

Then there’s the dead brother, Tamerlan. He murdered four people in his 10 years in the Great Satan. The Globe described him as a “stay-at-home dad.”

But we didn’t “truly open our hearts” to them. I don’t recall any Globe columns admonishing Americans to truly open our hearts to, say, Timothy McVeigh. And was McVeigh ever described as a “tow-headed terrorist”? Did Adam Lanza ever make the cover of the Rolling Stone?

What is this teenybopper crush these moonbats seem to develop on terrorists — but only foreign-born Muslim terrorists who want to impose the Sharia law that would lead to the immediate execution of most of their liberal cheerleaders?

Google “Dzhokhar” and “tousle-haired” and you’ll get 3,540 hits.

When will these Trustafarians open their hearts to some of their fellow Americans, like, say, Tea Party members? That’ll never happen. After all, when was the last time you saw a tousle-haired, pot-peddling Tea Party member?

Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil – Isaiah 5:20

Okay, so let me see if I’ve got this straight — former President Bill Clinton is now considered to be a, Convicted Felon. Something about LYING to the Grand Jury regarding his extra-marital affair with then-White House Intern Monica Lewinsky while he was serving as our President. Most us still remember “Slick Willie’s” famous quotes back in the late 90’s over how his semen mysteriously wound up on Lewinsky’s blue dress:

“It all depends what the definition of ‘is’, is.”

“Now I’m going to say this just one more time, I DID NOT HAVE SEXUAL RELATIONS WITH THAT WOMAN, Miss Lewinsky.”

I believe the more common legal term used to describe former President Clinton’s conviction is, “PERJURY”. Among other things, Bill Clinton is prohibited from ever practicing law again in our country. Former Boston radio talk show host Jay Severin raised the point that Clinton is the ONLY American President to ever have been impeached from office — despite the fact that he was never “recalled” or removed from the Presidency via a vote of Congress.

With all that having been said, why the heck was this guy’s speech at the Democratic National Convention two weeks ago given so much credibility? Clinton is now being referred to as a “Rock star” and many political pundits say he’s most responsible for Barack Obama’s post-convention “bump” in the Presidential polls. And that’s all due to a convicted PERJURER, a.k.a. a convicted LIAR, in Bill Clinton. Incidentally, take a look at this Internet posting from soon after Clinton’s speech at the DNC, which was apparently put through a “Fact Check” investigation:  ( http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/09/06/Fact-Check-Top-Ten-Clinton-Lies  ).  Just like a Leopard can’t separate itself from its spots, good ol’ Bill Clinton still spews out the blatant LIES at a pretty good rate as most of our “political pundits” simply sugarcoat that trait as being a “Rock star”. Is it just me, ladies and gentlemen, or is there something very, very BLEEPED up in our countries priorities?

But is this just a reflection of our American society, in general, to put so much trusted faith and credence in an individual with so much moral and ethical ineptitude?

Several years ago, popular Boston Globe columnist Mike Barnicle was fired when it was proven that many of his published articles were “plagiarized” or copied from other sources without citing any attribution. So like “Perjury”, “Plagiarism” is basically just another synonym for “Lying”. So what do you suppose happened to Barnicle AFTER
he was terminated from the Boston Globe for “plagiarism”? He was not only hired as a columnist for the city rival, Boston Herald, he was afforded ample TV and radio appearance gigs to opine on his views on various Boston and national related topics. Only in America, I suppose.

Another Boston Globe columnist who was terminated for “Plagiarism” was sports guy, Ron Borges. Like a cat just thrown out of the window of a multi-story building, Borges managed to “land on all fours” and soon hooked up with the Boston Herald as a sports columnist, along with a Boston radio gig as a “regular expert guest”.

Don’t ever let “lies” and “lack of credibility” ever stand in the way of good ratings, I always say.

Speaking about exploiting blatant lies to your advantage, Lowell radio station WCAP 980 AM constantly repeats the motto, “Everybody Gets It” about a zillion times during its broadcasts. In reality, WCAP has the absolute worst Arbitron radio ratings in the area, even before it adopted that slogan about five years ago. Truth be told, it would appear that “Nobody is ‘Getting’ it” at ‘CAP, according to the radio stations’ most popular rating system. And while most reputable radio stations tweak its formats and personnel to remain a viable entity against its competition, ‘CAP hasn’t changed a darn thing since the new management team bought that station back in ’07.  Un – BLEEPIN – believable!!! I can only assume ‘CAP advertisers have never asked to view the Arbitron ratings of that station over the past couple of years.

File under: Naive and Gullible.

Last but by all means least, can somebody please explain to me how the heck the Presidential polls are even remotely close with Barack Obama handling the attacks on the U.S. Embassies in Egypt and Libya last week (especially with four Americans killed in the Embassy of Libya) sort of like the aftermath of a coat-hanger abortion? And how the heck are the American people believing that these latest rash of problems in the Middle East are all Mitt Romney’s fault? Granted, Romney may be a “candidate” for this year’s Presidential race, perhaps even the “favorite” to win the whole thing, but as of RIGHT NOW, Mr. Romney has ZERO authority to control United States’ interests in that region of the world. That would fall under the parameters of President Barack Obama, and all of his cronies. Four years ago, then-challenger Barack Obama blamed all of America’s problems on George W. Bush. This time around, he’s blaming everything on Mitt Romney. Have you noticed a “pattern” here with Barack Obama when competing in election campaigns?

Should Mitt Romney win the U.S. Presidency this Nov. 6th, what will happen to all these “brilliant pundits” who actually coordinate the data for these “supposedly reliable” polls? In the private sector, if someone does a substandard job, they’ll be terminated. If a business puts out a substandard product or service, they usually wind up filing Bankruptcy and going “out of business”. With all that having been said, please explain to me why the heck we should put any credibility in these “Liberal-tainted” polls when they can hardly ever give us even a half-ass accurate gauge of what the American voter is actually thinking. Somehow, I think, these people need to take responsibility for their own BLEEP ups.