Some "journalists" want Warren to have free pass

Some so-called journalists are advising their colleagues against questioning veracity-challenged Elizabeth "Throwing Bull" Warren about Medicare for All and how she plans to have us pay for it.

Warren, who claims to be only 70, is one of the top contenders for the Democratic nomination but may eventually vie for a spot on "Dancing With the Stars" if the presidential gig doesn't pan out.

For Warren and her fellow leftists, government cannot be big enough. She is staunchly behind a total government takeover of the healthcare industry, which of course would be like putting early Ebenezer Scrooge in charge of Welfare benefits.

The 1/1024th Native American refuses to acknowledge that her plan would mean a huge increase in taxes among the middle class, and this continues to prompt actual reporters to ask her to clarify the plan, which she is loath to do. All she keeps saying is that "overall costs" would go down.

At least Sen. "Brooklyn" Bernie Sanders (I-VT) admitted that the same plan, which he was first to propose and which Warren stole from him, would indeed raise taxes up the wazoo, while also claiming that overall costs would go down. Bernie proposed a 4 percent tax increase on families making more than $29,000 a year, which is peanuts and would burden the poor even more drastically than is currently the case.

In the Democratic debates when the moderator asked gay South Bend Mayor Pete Buttigieg after Warren asked him to explain his use of the word "evasive," Buttigieg said, "Well, we heard it tonight. A yes or no question that didn't get a yes or no answer."

Buttigieg added: “This is why people here in the Midwest are so frustrated with Washington in general and Capitol Hill in particular. Your signature, senator, is to have a plan for everything, except this. No plan has been laid out to explain how a multi-trillion-dollar hole in this Medicare for All plan that Sen. Warren is putting forward is supposed to get filled in.”

The left loves to do this--think Nancy Pelosi and Obamacare when she said that we have to pass the bill so we can know what's in it.

Washington Post columnist Margaret Sullivan, the former public editor of the New York Times, said after the debate that asking Warren about how she’d finance Medicare for All was “doing President Trump’s work for him.”

Because the truth actually does do President Trump's work for him.

But let's pretend that the press is actually on the side of Trump, not the Democrats. We can refer to the claim as "gas lighting."

New York University professor Jay Rosen, who teaches journalism [but is not related to James Rosen, a journalist who was labeled a "conspirator" by the Obama administration], chimed in on Twitter on Wednesday, saying: “The ‘make Elizabeth Warren say she would raise taxes on the middle class’ question should be a credibility killer. For the journalists who keep asking it.”

Actually, it seems the opposite is true--most people believe the media is in the pocket of the left and pursuing an answer to a question that would directly affect all taxpayers are not only fair, but crucial in understanding where candidates stand on important issues.

Huffington Post leftist-editor-in-chief Lydia Polgreen, another former New York Times hack, also criticized the notion of unbiased journalism.

“’Will you raise middle class taxes’ is a lazy, gotcha question based on untested premises,” she lied. “A fairer question would be to ask candidates to explain how they’d convince voters of the tax tradeoff’s benefits.”

Medicare for All is projected to cost $32.6 trillion over 10 years. That translates to more dollars than all the paper on Earth to print that amount.


Please consider following this blog and feel free to click on the ads on this page. It costs nothing, and may just save your life. Or not. But seriously, please check out the ads as this is my source of generating revenue. And you can also see my blog on the Times of Israel.




Tweet