If you don't want to miss anything posted on the Americans For Truth website, sign up for our "Feedblitz" service that gives you a daily email of every new article that we post. (This service DOES NOT replace the regular email list.) To sign up for the Feedblitz service, click here.
Reporters sound like “gay” activists at homosexual journalists fundraiser in New York City
Contessa Brewer of MSNBC says giving fair coverage to opponents of homosexuality would be like giving “fair coverage for racists.”
By Peter LaBarbera
NEW YORK CITY — MSNBC anchor Contessa Brewer said at a “gay journalists” fundraiser Thursday that for the media to give fair coverage to “the other side” of the homosexual rights debate — pro-family advocates who oppose homosexuality — would be like giving “fair coverage for racists.”
“You know what’s so funny about this? When we’re talking about racism, nobody ever says, ‘Do you think there’s fair coverage for racists?’” Brewer said.
Asserting that opposition to homosexuality is objectively “wrong,” Brewer said, “I think that there’s a difference between being objective and being fair. And sometimes wrong is wrong, and the right thing to do is say when it’s wrong.”
Brewer made the comments in a short interview with this writer at the annual fundraising event for the National Lesbian and Gay Journalists Association (NLGJA). I attended the “Headlines and Headliners benefit” as a critical observer along with Cliff Kincaid of the conservative group America’s Survival.
Brewer, NBC “Today Show” host Matt Lauer, Today Show co-host Natalie Morales, “CBS This Morning” co-host Gayle King and other major media TV media personalities attended the NLGJA fundraiser and lauded the homosexual group’s work. Morales, who hosted the event. told this writer in an interview that homosexual rights is “a new civil rights movement.” In her speech to about 300 attendees, she celebrated the advances of the LGBT movement (including same-sex “marriage”) and applauded the NLGJA, now in its 18th year. Noting the media’s key role in the propelling “gay” rights forward, Morales said, “”We’re all united in this cause.”
Among the sponsoring news corporations at the NLGJA fundraiser were: NBC Universal (lead sponsor); CBS News, CNN, Fox News, The New York Times; Bloomberg News, Buzzfeed; and Newsday. The NLGJA raised $75,000 from the event, according to its website.
Following is a verbatim transcript of this writer’s interview with Brewer, taken from a video of it shot by Kincaid:
Q: I’m Peter LaBarbera with Americans For Truth…. We’re sort of on the other side of the issue. We’re for traditional marriage and so forth….My question is: for some in the media, are you afraid that there’s not fair coverage for the other side – [that] now it’s veering so far the other way… that sometimes there’s a tendency to—
Contessa Brewer:— You know what’s so funny about this? When we’re talking about racism, nobody ever says, ‘Do you think there’s fair coverage for racists?’ That’s my feeling about the matter. I think that there’s a difference between being objective and being fair. And sometimes wrong is wrong, and the right thing to do is say when it’s wrong.
LaBarbera: A lot of Christians, for example, think that racism is a sin, but they also think tht homosexuality [is a sin]–
Brewer: –You know what I say? I grew up as the daughter of a Baptist preacher, and you know what my answer always is? If you think it’s wrong, then don’t do it. Thank you. [she walks away]
Courtesy of Accuracy in Media’s blog and Eyeblast TV: CBS News’ Chief Legal Correspondent Jan Crawford questions why the White House is trying to hide Elena Kagan’s liberalism. So much for Obama’s “transparency” …
‘Gay’ agenda not raised in three presidential debates — but don’t just blame the media …
By Peter LaBarbera
OK, now it’s official. In three presidential debates to help us decide which man – John McCain or Barack Obama – will lead this nation, the critical issue of homosexual “marriage” didn’t even come up.
Add to that the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), the federal “hate crimes” bill and Employment Nondiscrimination Act (ENDA), homosexuality in the military, how “gay rights” laws threaten religious and other freedoms, and homosexual adoption of children.
On each of these issues, Obama and McCain strongly disagree, but we never (or barely) got to hear them explain their positions on the same stage – in contrast to Rick Warren’s Saddleback Church debate where at least “gay marriage” was discussed. The only time that homosexuality was raised in the four official debates, including the vice-presidential debate, was when moderator Gwen Ifill asked a poorly constructed question about same-sex benefits and then “gay marriage” to Gov. Sarah Palin and Sen. Joe Biden.
The issue of judicial appointments did come up but certainly has received far less attention than it deserves since judges are setting now policy in this country.
Do you feel as gypped as I do by the combination of media bias, campaign jingoism and political correctness that resulted in one of the most important issues facing our nation — whether marriage should be radically redefined to accommodate “rights” based on homosexual behavior – not even being mentioned in the official debates?
CLICK ON PHOTO TO ENLARGE. Chicago’s CBS TV affiliate fields a float every year at the city’s bawdy homosexual “pride” parade, but CBS and other major Chicago secular media were no-shows at AFTAH’s pro-family coalition press conference yesterday highlighting a huge and growing pro-family boycott of McDonald’ s (based outside Chicago). McDonald’s was given a high 85% rating by a homosexual lobby group for its pro-homosexuality and pro-transsexuality policies. Photo courtesy Illinois Family Institute.
Dave Diersen, an Illinois Republican activist, has provided a summary of the coverage of our press conference in front of McDonald’s’ world headquarters in Oak Brook, Illinois. Predictably, I suppose, we were completely blacked out by Chicago’s and Illinois’ major media — which had no excuse since they were inundated with press releases about the event by four pro-family organizations taking part: Americans For Truth, American Family Association, Illinois Family Institute and Liberty Counsel. It appears that the Fox News item below came from AP.
So once again the major media are doing the work of the homosexual lobby. Many in the media have decided that the “gay” issue is settled, and the homosexual activists have won. (Remember when Big Media thought the abortion issue was pretty much over?) Yesterday’s non-coverage was appalling journalism, even by corrupt Chicago standards. Clearly, the boycott story is compelling — even from a pure business perspective: already, nearly 200,000 people have signed AFA’s boycott petition (www.boycottmcdonalds.com).
Concerned Women for America writes: “An altercation on a college campus leads to federal hate crimes charges against student Brett VanAsdlen despite the fact that all other charges stemming from the event were dropped. Matt Barber, CWA’s Policy Director for Cultural Issues discusses this incident with Pete LaBarbera, President of Americans for Truth and Bob Knight, Director of the Culture and Media Institute, an arm of the Media Research Center.”
The message here is that there’s a special class of victim. If a homosexual is involved in this equation at all, the media and the legal system are supposed to presumably come to the aid of the homosexual every time. And it’s that selective victimization that you’re talking about, Matt, that’s so frightening.
Selective prosecution illustrates danger of ‘hate crimes’ laws
Brett VanAsdlen
TAKE ACTION:1) Urge Champaign County, Illinois State’s Attorney Julia Rietz (phone: 217-384-3733) to drop the government’s one-sided felony “hate crimes” prosecution against 18-year-old student-athlete Brett VanAsdlen — based on the inconsistent and likely exaggerated claims of Steven Velasquez, a homosexual University of Illinois (U of I) student who may have initiated physical contact with VanAsdlen. Already, Brett is being smeared as violent “gay-basher” by Velasquez and pro-homosexual activists in the media. Pray for Brett and his family.
2) Call or write WCIA-3 TV, the local CBS affiliate, and urge them to be fair in their coverage of this unfortunate story. Call (217) 373-3650 and ask for Producer Nancy Foreman. WCIA reporter Amanda Evans has led the TV coverage of the story, but her reporting appears to heavily favor Velasquez. It is wrong to smear the reputation of young man by airing all the accusations against him without presenting the other side of the story.
_____________________________
By Peter LaBarbera
CHAMPAIGN-URBANA, Illinois — Two young men — one homosexual, one heterosexual — tell very different stories about an argument that occurred late on a Friday night (April 11) in this college town, but only one — the straight student-athlete — faces a felony “hate crime” conviction with a maximum penalty of up to three years in prison.
Brett VanAsdlen faces a Class 4 felony hate crime after originally being charged with aggravated battery following an incident in which he pushed 20-year-old homosexual University of Illinois student Steven Velasquez to the ground. The critical question is: why did he push Velasquez and who was aggressor? VanAsdlen’s family says it was Velasquez who — after Brett made a comment about Velasquez and his homosexual partner — first “got in Brett’s face,” to which Brett responded by pushing Velasquez away. Velasquez claims that Brett attacked him unprovoked because of his homosexuality.
You can read and watch WCIA-TV’s initial, one-sided account of the incident featuring an interview with Velasquez HERE — which set the tone for those seeking to portray VanAsdlen as a violent hate criminal.
CBS’s Lesley Stahl: “I’m surprised at how many people really, really hate you. These are some things we’ve been told: ‘He’s evil;’ ‘He’s a Neanderthal;’ ‘He’s going to drag us back to 1789.’ They’re threatened by what you represent and what you believe in.”
Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia: “These are people that don’t understand what my interpretive philosophy is. I’m not saying no progress. I’m saying we should progress democratically.”…
Stahl: “But his critics argue that originalism is a cover for what they see as Justice Scalia’s real intention: to turn back some pivotal court decisions of the ’60s and ’70s. He’s been labeled a ‘counterrevolutionary.'”
From my good friend Robert Knight, director of the Culture & Media Institute, a division of the Media Research Center that examines how media bias undermines faith and traditional American values–PL:
Most liberal media outlets reacted in similar fashion to Tuesday’s major Maryland Court of Appeals ruling, which upholds the state’s law defining marriage as one man-one woman. They presented it through the lavender lens of homosexual activism.
CBS News’ Web site ran this headline: Maryland Court Upholds Gay Marriage Ban
Calling the law a “gay marriage ban” is as misleading as describing it as a “ban on polygamous marriage,” or a “ban on incestuous marriage” or perhaps a “ban on interspecies marriage.” For the record, the Court in Conaway vs. Deane notes that neither the 1973 law nor the legislative debate at the time address “sexual orientation” nor any “gay” issue. All the law does is reiterate the fundamental nature of marriage for legal purposes.
To liberal journalists, however, a law merely acknowledging the timeless definition of marriage as the union of one man and one woman is unacceptable. Such a law must be depicted only as a negative, as a ban rather than an affirmation.
The CBS article itself was straightforward at the top, but devolved into passages like this:
Many of the plaintiffs have children, and they argue that their families are being denied the stability and legal protection that comes from having married parents.
Lisa Kebreau, 39, and her partner, Mikki Mozelle, 31, who live in Riverdale, have three children – ages 17, 2 and 20 months.
“We really wanted them to understand how normal and good their family is – that their family is just like any other family,” Kebreau said.
CBS quoted no pro-marriage spokesman in response who might have argued that kids deserve to have both a mother and a father. The story also did not explain the court’s key finding that “sexual orientation” is not a civil rights class such as sex, race and ethnicity.
The Baltimore Sun ran this headline: Court Upholds Md. Gay Marriage Ban
The story, a cardinal example of advocacy journalism, was devoted to homosexual activists and liberal jurists complaining about the ruling or vowing to create “gay marriage” by other means. Not a single pro-marriage spokesperson was quoted.
The Washington Post’s article gave a more balanced account, but spent most of its ink criticizing the decision and discussing how to circumvent it. The opening sentence reflects the Post’s bias, describing Maryland’s marriage law as “the state’s ban on gay marriage” and “the controversial law.”
In fact, the marriage law is not controversial, at least outside homosexual activist and liberal media circles. All 50 states have laws defining marriage as the union of a man and a woman (even Massachusetts, which still has no business issuing same-sex marriage licenses without a change in the law).
What is controversial is Baltimore Circuit Court Judge M. Brooke Murdock’s nutso January ruling striking the law down. Murdock wrote that the law violates a state constitutional provision guaranteeing equal rights. By her reasoning, any specific definition of a relationship or status could violate the rights of somebody who does not qualify. Perhaps we should all be considered “doctors,” not just those folks who graduated from medical school.
