A list of CNN (TV) Headlines, 8/4/16

This is not scientific in any way, shape or form. But it is an attempt to show what On-Air CNN Television personalities talk about.

Are they critical of the President? Or only of Trump? Is it critical of government? Or are the headlines mainly approving of government? Or -- are the headlines deflective of government malfeasance? Does it omit stories critical of those in power? Do the headlines tend to come from a liberal angle, conservative angle, a libertarian angle, a communist angle, or is it balanced? Are they critical of mostly Republicans? Or are they critical of mostly Democrats? Is the channel generally pro-religion or anti-religion? Pro-Christianity or anti-Christianity? Pro-Islam or anti-Islam? Pro-atheist or anti-atheist?

I want to know.

Given that I was creating this list while busy, I couldn't catch every single headline that flashed across the TV screen. However, I do think it is very representative as I probably looked at the television screen every other minute or so from about 12 PM to 4 PM.

What I found is that CNN focused on Trump at least 22 times; President Barack Obama 10 times; House Speaker Paul Ryan 10 times; and Hillary 2 times.

Now, as I said, this wasn't scientific. However, I did look at the screen a lot from that time. I did not keep my eyes glued to the screen....

...but I really don't think I missed Hillary Clinton that many times.

Looking at the headlines we see that....

1. RYAN NOT READY TO PULL TRUMP ENDORSEMENT
2. RUSSIA: WE BELIEVE 270 OF OUR ATHLETES CLEARED TO COMPETE
3. NEW BATTLEGROUND STATE POLLS GIVE CLINTON THE EDGE
4. CNN/ORC POLL SHOWS OBAMA WITH 54% JOB APPROVAL
5. POLL: OBAMA APPROVAL RATING ON THE RISE
6. NEW BATTLEGROUND STATE POLLS GIVE CLINTON THE EDGE
7. NORTH CAROLINA MAN ACCUSED OF SUPPORTING ISIS
8. TRUMP MEETS WITH FAMILIES OF 6 FALLEN SOLDIERS
9. OP-ED: TRUMP SUPPORTING IS "INDEFENSIBLE"
10. CLINT EASTWOOD TALKS RACISM AND TRUMP
11. SOON: OBAMA FACES QUESTIONS ON $400 IRAN PAYMENT
12. WHITE HOUSE: $400M CASH TO IR
13. OBAMA GETS POST-CONVENTION BUMP IN POLLS
14. CAN A RISING OBAMA HELP HILLARY CLINTON?
15. EASTWOOD: 2012 "EMPTY CHAIR" STUNT "WAS SILLY"
16. CLINT EASTWOOD APPLAUDS TRUMP'S RHETORIC
17. PREGNANT WOMEN IN MIAMI RUSH TO GET ZIKA TESTS
18. EXPECTANT MOTHERS IN MIAMI SCRAMBLE TO GET ZIKA TESTS
19. SOON: DONALD TRUMP SPEAKS LIVE AT RALLY SOON (?)
20. CHARLESTON CHURCH SUSPECT ASSAULTED IN JAIL
21. YOUNG GYMNAST RETURNS TO SPORT AFTER LEUKEMIA
22. GYMNAST CONTRACTS LEUKEMIA, FACES COMPLICATIONS
23. ANY MOMENT: TRUMP SPEAKS AFTER RYAN RETURNS FIRE
24. RYAN WON'T RULE OUT YANKING TRUMP ENDORSEMENT
25. PAUL RYAN ON TRUMP: MY "DUTY" TO DEFEND GOP
26. NEW POLL: CLINTON TOPS TRUMP IN 3 KEY STATES
27. SOON: HILLARY CLINTON HOLDS RALLY IN LAS VEGAS ***
28. CLINTON SLAMS TRUMP DURING TOUR IN LAS VEGAS
29. NEW POLL: CLINTON TOPS TRUMP IN 3 KEY STATES
30. RYAN WON'T RULE OUT YANKING TRUMP ENDORSEMENT
31. POLLS: CLINTON TOPS TRUMP IN THREE KEY STATES
32. ANY MOMENT: TRUMP SPEAKS AFTER RYAN RETURNS FIRE
33. RYAN (AGAIN) USES “BEYOND THE PALE” REACTING TO TRUMP
34. OBAMA GETS POST-CONVENTION BUMP IN POLLS
35. SOON: TRUMP, CLINTON HOLD COMPETING EVENTS
36. U.S. OFFICIALS: NO IRAN “ULTIMATUM” TO SEND $400M CASH
37. TRUMP COMMENTS ON U.S. PAYMENT TO IRAN
38. TRUMP AGAIN CLAIMS HE SAW VIDEO OF IRAN PAYMENT
39. TRUMP SPEAKS AFTER RYAN SLAM POST-RNC CAMPAIGN
40. TRUMP: “HOW STUPID ARE WE” TO PAY IRAN
41. BRAZILIAN COUPLES DELAY PREGNANCY DUE TO ZIKA
42. OBAMA: MY DAUGHTERS DESERVE A FEMINIST DAD
43. CLINTON REPEATS FALSE CLAIM FBI DIRECTOR SAID SHE WAS “TRUTHFUL”
44. OBAMA: IRAN NUCLEAR AGREEMENT IS WORKING
45. OBAMA: WE DO NOT PAY RANSOM FOR HOSTAGES
46. OBAMA UPS ATTACK ON TRUMP AS APPROVAL RATING RISES

Where is the focus on the issues? A few comments.

#46 OBAMA UPS ATTACK ON TRUMP AS APPROVAL RATING RISES

First of all. I think this is a made-up connection here. I really don't think Obama is consciously taking advantage of this approval ratings here. But the headline gives the connection that he is.

# 42 OBAMA: MY DAUGHTERS DESERVE A FEMINIST DAD

Why is this national news? This doesn't belong on national television, but on niche sites, cultural sites. 

#14 CAN A RISING OBAMA HELP HILLARY CLINTON?

Can a discussion of the platforms that she and Donald Trump are running on help their campaigns. Can a substantial report on Donald Trump's sane position on Russia hurt Hillary Clinton? Can we discuss their ideas? Can we hold politicians accountable? Can we move away from "He said, She Said" stories? Can we #bringbackjournalism? 

I'm not going to go on. But I am biased towards stories that highlight government corruption, and I really don't like celebrity stories, or stories that advance the "conversation" in a destructive way.

Matt Drudge and I agree: Globalists freak out over Trump

Snapshot of the August 2, 2016 Drudge Report

President Obama is no revolutionary.

Rather he is of the status quo.

Today he played the role of gatekeeper of that status quo: Donald Trump absolutely cannot become president. He is unfit. Blah. Blah. Blah.

This morning when I saw the headlines about President Obama, referencing the above activity, I immediately thought that the globalists were freaking out.

This afternoon I went on the Drudge Report and I found agreement there.

Matt Drudge calls Obama out for his globalist gatekeeping on August 2, 2016.

Media is doing the World a Disservice by ignoring Trump's substantive issues

Courtesy of The Atlantic

Hat tip to Real Clear Politics who published an article called "Russian Expert Stephen Cohen: Trump Wants To Stop The New Cold War, But The American Media Just Doesn't Understand."

Stephen F. Cohen is a contributing editor at the progressive publication The Nation, which also ran the story.

The premise of the story is that Trump's substantive issues get totally ignored because the media focuses on Trump's more colorful sayings.

From the Real Clear Politics article:

Cohen says the media at large is doing a huge disservice to the American people by ignoring the substance of Trump's arguments about NATO and Russia, and buying the Clinton campaign's simplistic smear that Trump is a Russian "Manchurian candidate."

"That reckless branding of Trump as a Russian agent, most of it is coming from the Clinton campaign," Cohen said. "And they really need to stop."

"We're approaching a Cuban Missile Crisis level nuclear confrontation with Russia," he explained. "And there is absolutely no discussion, no debate, about this in the American media."

"Then along comes, unexpectedly, Donald Trump," he continued, "Who says he wants to end the New Cold War, and cooperate with Russia in various places... and --astonishingly-- the media is full of what only can be called neo-McCarthyite charges that he is a Russian agent, that he is a Manchurian candidate, and that he is Putin's client."

What Cohen is saying about the media is true.

For instance, as I sit here, less than an hour ago CNN ran a story on television on the fact that Donald Trump eats KFC with a knife and a fork. This is a story that shouldn't make the Food Network. But here we have a channel -- remember, a CNN executive declared that they are "no longer a news network" -- that spends most of the day covering political happenings talking about how Donald eats fast food in his private jet. This is ridiculous.

As I visit Yahoo minutes ago, there the editors published a story called "Trump at rally: ‘Get the baby out of here’" -- and it's the top story when you first get on the page.

It took three words for the mainstream media to use a buzzword to try to scare voters away from Trump. It begins: "In a bizarre..." -- there's really no need to finish the rest of the article, because it focuses on the least serious part of the speech, which I listened to most of, if not its entirety. The Yahoo News article doesn't even focus on any thing else said in the speech.

One hundred and fifty words wasted...

...one hundred and fifty words-sized bullet to try to take down Trump.

Yahoo News leading story. This is serious journalism, folks.

Here's a more serious part of the August 2, 2016 speech in Ashburn, Virginia, that aligns with the topic at hand:

TRUMP:  I want to get along with China. By the way wouldn't it be great if we got along with Russia? Wouldn't that be great?

(APPLAUSE)

If we actually had a relationship with Russia, instead of all the fighting and money and the problems and if we could get Russia and others to partner up and go and knock the hell out of ISIS, wouldn't that be a good thing? Wouldn't that be a good thing?

Now, I don't think we should even be getting involved with ISIS in that way. But here we have Donald Trump saying that he wants to get along with China and he wants to restore relations with Russia. "Wouldn't that be great?"

At the August 2 rally in Ashburn, Virginia, Trump also said of Hillary Clinton:

Hillary Clinton will be worse. She'll be worse. OK? Hillary Clinton will be worse.

She has bad relationships with people like Putin. I'll give you an example. She has terrible relationships with Putin. This is a nuclear country we're talking about. Russia, strong nuclear country.

And so are we. But their stuff is newer. Their stuff is newer. So she's looking at -- they have more -- I don't even want to say it -- they have a lot more, OK? So you know, she wants to play the tough one. She's not tough. She's not tough.

I know tough people, she's not tough. I mean she's -- she's just -- she's doing the handlers, they push her from place to place that's all it is. You saw her speech the other night. 

I mean they talk about presidential, do you think she looks presidential? I don't think so.

I don't think so. So -- so you know, she wants to play the role of the tough guy against Putin and Russia and she wants to play not tough, not tough. She should be tough on trade, OK?

Meanwhile, can you guess which Democrat said this about Republican Presidential Candidate Donald Trump last week at the 2016 Democratic National Convention?

"We cannot elect a man who belittles our closest allies while embracing dictators like Vladimir Putin."

Look who's shooting from the hip now: the man one spot away from the presidency, the #2 man in the Obama administration, Joe Biden, is here recklessly calling "world leaders" dictators, even though his administration won't confirm that designation. Again, if Hillary Clinton is going to "continue Obama's agenda," then we can expect more "fool rush in" status quo foreign policy from Hillary Clinton.

As Donald says in many rallies, the media is totally corrupt. He said it today in Ashburn, Virginia.

I agree with Cohen. As I wrote to a friend recently:

That said, Trump definitely says a lot of interesting and agreeable things on foreign policy. He raises very serious questions about our priorities that gets drowned out because of the media. The media is good at shutting off serious debate whenever they find something disagreeable about him...and there is a lot to disagree.

Additionally, I wrote:

I like the idea of an "America first" foreign policy because we haven't had an America first foreign policy for about 50 years, even though it was our policy at least 150 years, according to one expert .

I meant 60 years, per Ivan Eland's numbers.

Read the article and transcript here

Professing Jesus Christ isn't enough in politics

Professing Jesus Christ isn't enough in politics.

It's too low a bar to hop over, no matter how authentic the statement.

Pro-life politics aren't enough either.

What's needed is a full-orbed Christian philosophy: one that understands foreign policy, monetary policy, welfare (not welfare statism), the role of the government, the role of churches (and private organizations), and the role of individuals and families, for starters, from a Christian perspective.

(The candidate who has the most of this is Rand Paul, by the way)

Rubio, Trump, Cruz, et al. have a full-orbed something...it just ain't Christian.

Same goes for Hillary and Bernie.

I write this mainly because I saw a few Christians get excited about Marco Rubio, who, quite winsomely, confessed Christ while speaking to an atheist concerned about Rubio running for "Pastor in Chief." I was very convinced of Rubio's authentic love for the Lord.

But Rubio's hegemonic foreign policy -- his neoconservatism -- is in direct conflict with the claims and aims of the gospel. And remember, the president is Commander-in-Chief. It's one of the few explicit presidential duties delineated in the U.S. Constitution. Who he believes should be bombed is a big deal.

One day the wolf will dwell with the lamb, and Rubio's vision veers away from that tremendously.

Reason #2 Why I want to see Rand Paul Vs. Bernie Sanders

Picture Courtesy of POLITICO

My second reason for wanting Senator Rand Paul and Senator Bernie Sanders to win their parties' respective presidential nominations is also defensive.

Hillary Clinton, the only other person to have a chance at winning the Democratic presidential nomination, will advance the Bush/Obama march toward war in the Middle East. PCR says Clinton will ignite nuclear war.

She is way too dangerous.

Trump ought not win because as much as I like his non-interventionist foreign policy -- he believes Muslim countries should take care of ISIS -- he is a buffoon when it comes to both domestic and international economics. He touts protectionist economic claptrap that has been refuted centuries ago.

He will aid in the destruction of our economy.

The latter criticism -- foreign policy and all -- applies to Sanders, too. But socialism was only refuted fairly recently in 1991. Democratic socialism, which Sanders advocates, clearly hasn't been refuted in the eyes of the public.

Read Rand Paul's Best Debate?!?

Get a free E-book on Bernie Sanders here.

Watch Senator Rand Paul discuss his Vision For America

Carly Fiorina: Donald Trump Went Bankrupt Four Times

Carly Fiorina points out that Donald Trump invested other people's money and went bankrupt four times.

Donald Trump denied going bankrupt.

But a video posted by Reason.TV just moments before the exchange reveals that Donald Trump did, in fact, go bankrupt.

Trump biographer Jerome Tucille explains that "[Trump] doesn't do a deal unless other people are putting up the money. He's very good at losing other people's money and preserving his own."

Fiorina brought up his bankruptcy and investing habits in light of taxpayer money.

This is my interpretation of what she said, but I think Fiorina was making the connection that as president he will badly spend taxpayer money.

I think it's a good point. The great wall of America which Trump wants to build to keep immigrants out is an example of that. Taxpayers -- even if Mexican taxpayers -- will lose tons of money on an expensive project that can be spent elsewhere or (even better) not spent at all.

"Other people," in this case Mexican taxpayers, will be on the hook for one of Donald Trump's investments.

Trump's website says "a nation without a border is not a nation." So, apparently, the 239 years that have passed since 1776 we were never a nation. And, apparently, ever other country that lacks a wall also are not, and never have been, nations.

Video: Donald Trump is 'Very Good at Losing Other People's Money'