Media Bias? Glenn compares Ann Romney's and Michelle Obama's interviews on "The View"

October 19, 2012

Writer

Ann Romney entered the hostile territory of The View yesterday and was greeted by

a confrontational Whoopi Goldberg. Unlike Michelle Obama, Ann was met by questions on abortion and Mormonism.

"I'm watching the highlights of The View and I thought to myself, this is crazy," Glenn said of Whoopi's comments on the faith.

Here is the exchange between Goldberg and the potential First Lady:

Whoopi: As First Lady if you get the job, it's going to entail a lot of things, and one of those things is going to be talking to the mothers whose children are coming home in bags, you know, from wars. Now, I know ‑‑ I believe that your religion doesn't allow you to go fight?

Ann: No, that's not correct.

Whoopi: Okay. So ‑‑

Ann: We have many, many members of our faith that are serving in armed services.

Whoopi: Okay. Well, I say that because when I read about your husband, what I had read, and maybe you can correct this, is that the reason that he didn't serve in Vietnam was because it was against the religion. That's what we ‑‑ that's what I read.

Ann: No, that's not ‑‑ that's not correct.

Clearly The View co-host didn't bother doing any research prior to her interview with Ann Romney. But even if you try to give her the benefit of the doubt and think, 'maybe she was just trying to be fair and balanced,' if you look back at previous segments The View has done with the current First Lady, Michelle Obama, that is obviously not the case.

And that's exactly what Glenn and Pat did this morning on radio.

Last Spring, Michelle Obama made a solo stop on The View, so Glenn and Pat decided to pull the first ten questions/follow-up statements, from each interview: Ann Romney's and Michelle Obama's.

"Let's see if we can detect any discernible difference in the way the two ladies are treated here," Glenn said. "Because that should, should, speak volumes."

"I mean, there's no better example than comparing apples to apples," Pat responded. "You have two, one is a First Lady, the other is a potential First Lady, and they've both been on the exact same show. And so how are they each treated?"

"Right," Glenn answered, "so let's look at the questions — just, the questions, not the answers. Let's look at the questions of the ladies on The View."

They started with the First Lady's interview:

1. Barbara Walter's asks, "In an interview just recently, you said, and I quote, that you are sometimes unsure if you are a classic First Lady and if the things you do are okay. So why do you feel this way and who is your idea of a classic First Lady?"
2. Referring to her not being a "typical First Lady" Walters asks, "Do you say to yourself maybe I've gone too far [from being a typical first lady]."
3. (Glenn notes that #3 is "technically not a question." but it does set up the next one.) "You're very popular, too, you know. So it's working. You're very popular," Joy Behar.
4. "We've talked about this before because your husband is our first black president, you are our first black First Lady. Do you think in this campaign which is getting fairly ugly that racism is still going to be a part of it?"
5. "I wonder if you are as upset as people like me?" Joy asked next.
6. "When he's getting these attacks that people don't believe he was born here, all sorts of lies are out there. What do you do?"
7. "What the president does for the world, but I heard that he does something special for you at night. President Obama, your husband, he tucks you in at night."

Number 8 comes from Elizabeth Hasselbeck, so it will be tough, right? Wrong.

8. "Obviously there's a lot of political pressure, but as a family how do you talk to the girls now? Because they're older, their perspective's probably a little different than it was four years ago. What do you say to them about practically what could, what could not happen, moving into November? Do you talk about it?"
9. Whoopi asks the hard-hitting question about the president, "Does he tease you?"
10. "I'll ask you, because we do want to have time to talk about the gardens and so but there have been rumors that if the president is not reelected or even in the future that you might consider running for political office?"

You can watch Michelle Obama on The View here:

So… not exactly a brutal interview. It didn't consist of a lot of controversial topics and everyone seemed very happy, nice, and excited to be involved.

Now lets take a look at Ann's:

1. "So we have been talking primarily about the women's issues and one of the things with your husband was that when he was a governor, he was pro choice and now is against abortions except in the case of rape and incest and the life of the mother. I wonder where your views are. Were you the same way when he was a governor?"
2. "Have you changed?"

So, Barbara Walter's started the interview of on the friendly topic of …abortion? Really? Clearly, there's no bias here.

3. "Let me ask you something to the economic point: Do you think that access to contraception and abortion is an economic issue as I was saying in the hot topics?"
4. "So, as First Lady, if you get the job, umm, it's going to entail a lot of things, and one of those things is going to be talking to the mothers whose children are coming home in bags, you know, from wars. Now I know your religion doesn't allow you to go fight?"

Incorrect, hostile, and somewhat offensive.

5. I had read, and maybe you can correct this, is that the reason that he didn't serve in Vietnam was it because it was against the religion?
6. When you're facing these mothers whose children have not come back, how will you explain to them that your sons haven't gone when you talk about the missions that they've gone on?"

"I don't know. They might handle it the same way Michelle Obama does whose husband didn't serve," Pat reacted.

The softball questions should be coming any moment now…

7. We had a lot of people during the convention who talked about the compassion of your family and the compassion of your husband. We're going to get to you, Josh, because your brother said that ‑‑ I think he said he would like to take a swipe or a swap or a punch or something — swing at president. So I want to know how you ‑‑ we all want to know how you feel. So you think you're going to have an easy ride here?

"Okay. So that's a threat to Josh who's sitting in the audience watching his mother. And so she takes a swipe now at him," Pat said. "Now your brother said he was going to take a swing at the president."

8. "So Ann, we mention Josh before is the audience here, son who actually has five kids of his own, four sons, one little girl Grace, right? Adorable. I know that there's been some sort of, like, family intervention in terms of campaign, new stuff that's going on. You're involved. What are those? And then also, do you have aspirations of a political career at all?"
9. "I know you've [Ann and Mitt] been together, what, 43 years of marriage? That is exceptional. And a bunch of grandkids as Barbara mentioned. There was one point, though, I think that, did you guys almost break up?"

And last but not least, a question that should offend all stay at home mothers.

10. "This is what I want to know, and I'm so glad it's only 17, 18, and 19 that your boys are at a selfish age. Good. Okay, three years. But you know, I heard, Mrs. Romney, that you don't watch any TV. What do you do all day if you don't watch TV?"

Watch the full interview here:

So not only has the left accused Ann Romney of "never working a day in her life" because she is a stay-at-home mom, they've now accused all stay-at-home mom's of doing nothing but watch TV all day. It's safe to say the ladies of The View are a little out-of-touch.

"My gosh, these women are despicable," Glenn said. "And I say that with firsthand knowledge. I've been on that show before. They are despicable witches. Ooh, did I say that out loud? Let me say it again. Despicable witches."

Critical theory destroys truth and justice

Editor's note: This article was originally published on TheBlaze.com.

Critical theory once stood out as the absurd progressive notion that it is. Now, its maxims are becoming an integral part of ordinary political discourse. The more you repeat a lie, the more you will believe it, and this is the very dangerous place in which we find ourselves today.

Take this critical theory maxim as an example: If we desire justice, we must sometimes champion what may appear superficially as injustice. It's a necessary evil, if you will, the necessity of “controlled injustice.”

By using truth through fabrication and controlled injustice for justice, we’ll save the republic. We’ll be acting in a noble way.

This definition of justice is defined by the “oppressed,” not the “oppressor.” It is the greatest happiness for the greatest number. To achieve this justice, however, we need to endorse acts on occasion that, while seemingly unjust, serve a higher purpose. It will ensure the stability and the unity of our republic, and this may manifest in ways that seem contradictory to our values. But these are the necessary shadows to cast light on “true justice.”

And isn’t that what we are all after, anyway?

Here’s another critical theory maxim: Sometimes we find the truth through fabrication. Our pursuit of truth sometimes requires a strategic use of falsehoods. The truth is a construct that has been shaped and tailored to promote the well-being of the collective.

We sometimes need to accept and propagate lies designed by "the system” — not the old system, but the system that we’re now using to replace the old to get more justice through injustice and more truth through fabrication.

We’re engaging in a higher form of honesty. When we fabricate, it’s for the right reason. We are reaching up to the heavens fighting for a higher sort of honesty. To fortify the truth, we occasionally must weave a tapestry of lies. Each thread, essential for the greater picture, will ultimately define our understanding and ensure our unity under this infallible wisdom.

The election is coming up. Does this maxim sound familiar? Many think it is imperative that we secure our republic through election control to maintain our republic. Sometimes, we might need to take actions that by traditional standards might be questionable.

The act of securing elections requires cheating. It's not mere deception. It is a noble act of safeguarding our way of life. We're on the verge of losing this democracy, and without deception, we will lose it.

To ensure it doesn't fall into the hands of those we know will destroy it, we may have to make a few fabrications. We're fabricating stories to be able to control or secure the republic through our elections. By using truth through fabrication and controlled injustice for justice, we'll save the republic. Therefore, we'll be acting in a noble way. Stealing an election from those who wish to harm our society is truly an act of valor and an essential measure to protect our values and ensure the continuation of our just society.

If we desire justice, we must sometimes champion what may appear superficially as injustice.

I know it's a paradox of honor through dishonor. But in this context, by embracing the dishonor, we achieve the highest form of honor, ensuring the stability and the continuation of our great republic.

Let this be heard, far and wide, as a great call to patriotic action. As we advance, let each of us, citizens of this great and honorable republic, consider these principles. Not as abstract or paradoxical but as practical guides to daily life. Embrace the necessity of controlled injustice, the utility of lies, the duty to secure our electoral process, and the honor and apparent dishonor. These are not merely strategies for survival. They are prerequisites for our prosperity.

We all have to remember that justice is what our leaders define, that truth is what our party tells us. Our republic stands strong on the values of injustice for justice, honor through dishonor, and the fabrication of truths. To deviate from this path is to jeopardize the very fabric of our society. Strength through unity; unity through strength.

We've heard this nonsense for so long. But now, this nonsense is becoming an instituted reality, and we are entering perilous times. Don't be fooled by the narratives you will hear during the march to November. Never let someone convince you that the ends justify the means, that a little bit of injustice is needed to achieve a broader, collective vision of justice, that truth sometimes requires fabricated lies and narratives. If we do, justice will cease to be justice, truth will cease to be truth, and our republic will be lost.

Top 5 MOST EVIL taxes the government extorts from you

David McNew / Staff | Getty Images

"In this world nothing is certain but death and taxes." -Ben Franklin

The injustice of taxation has been a core issue for Americans since the very beginning of our country, and it's a problem we have yet to resolve. This belief was recently reignited in many Americans earlier this month on tax day when the numbers were crunched and it was discovered that the government was somehow owed even more hard-earned money. As Glenn recently discussed on his show, it's getting to be impossible for most Americans to afford to live comfortably, inflation is rising, and our politicians keep getting richer.

The taxpayer's burden is heavier than ever.

The government is not above some real low blows either. While taxes are a necessary evil, some taxes stretch the definition of "necessary" and emphasize the "evil." Here are the top five most despicable taxes that are designed to line the IRS coffers at your expense:

Income Tax

Joe Raedle / Staff | Getty Images

"It would be a hard government that should tax its people one-tenth part of their income." -Ben Franklin

On February 24th, 2024 we hit a very unfortunate milestone, the 101st anniversary of the 16th Amendment, which authorized federal income tax. Where does the government get the right to steal directly out of your paycheck?

Death Taxes

Dan Mullan / Staff | Getty Images

"Now my advice for those who die, Declare the pennies on your eyes" -George Harrison

Not even in death can you escape the cold pursuit of the tax collector. It's not good enough that you have to pay taxes on everything you buy and every penny you make your entire life. Now the feds want a nice slice, based on the entire value of your estate, that can be as much as 40 percent. Then the state government gets to stick their slimy fingers all over whatever remains before your family is left with the crumbs. It's practically grave-robbery.

Payroll

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

"The power to tax is the power to destroy." -John Marshall

What's that? The nice chunk of your paycheck the government nabs before you can even get it to the bank wasn't enough? What if the government taxed your employer just for paying you? In essence, you make less than what your agreed pay rate is and it costs your employer more! Absolutely abominable.

Social Security

VALERIE MACON / Contributor | Getty Images

"We don't have a trillion-dollar debt because we haven't taxed enough; we have a trillion-dollar debt because we spend too much." -Ronald Reagan

Everyone knows the collapse of Social Security is imminent. It has limped along for years, only sustained by a torrent of tax dollars and the desperate actions of politicians. For decades, people have unwillingly forked over money into the system they will never see again.

FICA

Kevin Dietsch / Staff | Getty Images

"What at first was plunder assumed the softer name of revenue." -Thomas Paine

FICA is the payroll equivalent of Social Security. Your employer has to match however much you pay. It means it costs your employer even more to pay you—again, you'll NEVER see that money. At this point, are you even working for yourself, or are you just here to generate money for the government to frivolously throw away?

5 DISTURBING ways World War III will be different from previous wars

Oleg Nikishin / Stringer | Getty Images

Has World War III begun?

Over the weekend, Iran launched an unprecedented attack against Israel involving over 300 missiles and drones. This marked the first direct attack on Israel originating from Iranian territory. Fortunately, according to an Israel Defense Forces spokesperson Rear Admiral Daniel Hagari, 99 percent of missiles and drones were successfully neutralized by Israeli defense systems. Iran claimed that the operation against Israel had concluded and that no further offensive was planned, although the possibility of another attack is still present.

This has left many people, including Glenn, wondering the same thing: did we just witness the start of World War III?

Glenn recently had a World War II Air Force Veteran as a guest on his TV special, who told stories of the horrors he and his brothers-in-arms faced in the skies over war-torn Europe. This was a timely reminder of the terrors of war and a warning that our future, if it leads to another world war, is a dark one.

But, if Glenn's coverage of the Iranian attack revealed one thing, it's that World War III will look nothing like the world wars of the twentieth century. Long gone are the days of John "Lucky" Luckadoo and his "Bloody Hundredth" bravely flying their B-17s into battle. Over the weekend, we saw hundreds of autonomous drones and missiles clashing with extreme speed and precision over several different fronts (including space) simultaneously. This ain't your grandfather's war.

From EMP strikes to cyber attacks, here are FIVE ways the face of war has changed:

EMP attacks

New York Daily News Archive / Contributor | Getty Images

The entire modern world, on every level, is completely dependent on electricity. From your home refrigerator to international trade, the world would come to a grinding halt without power. And as Glenn has pointed out, it wouldn't even be that hard to pull off. All it would take is 3 strategically placed, high-altitude nuclear detonations and the entire continental U.S. would be without power for months if not years. This would cause mass panic across the country, which would be devastating enough on its own, but the chaos could be a perfect opportunity for a U.S. land invasion.

Nuclear strikes

Galerie Bilderwelt / Contributor | Getty Images

Nuclear war is nothing new. Many of us grew up during the Cold War, built fallout shelters, and learned to duck and cover. But times have changed. The Berlin Wall fell and so did the preparedness of the average American to weather a nuclear attack. As technology has advanced, more of our adversaries than ever have U.S. cities within their crosshairs, and as Glenn has pointed out, these adversaries are not exactly shy about that fact. Unfortunately, the possibility of an atomic apocalypse is as real as ever.

Immigration warfare

Nick Ut / Contributor | Getty Images

The strategy of strangling an opposing nation's economy to gain the upper hand is a wartime tactic as old as time. That's why the Border Crisis is so alarming. What better way to damage an opponent's economy than by overburdening it with millions of undocumented immigrants? As Glenn has covered, these immigrants are not making the trek unaided. There is a wide selection of organizations that facilitate this growing disaster. These organizations are receiving backing from around the globe, such as the WEF, the UN, and U.S. Democrats! Americans are already feeling the effects of the border crisis. Imagine how this tactic could be exploited in war.

Cyber shutdowns

Bill Hinton / Contributor | Getty Images

Cyber attacks will be a major tactic in future wars. We've already experienced relatively minor cyber strikes from Russia, China, and North Korea, and it is a very real possibility that one of our adversaries inflicts a larger attack with devastating consequences on the United States. In fact, the WEF has already predicted a "catastrophic" cyber attack is imminent, and Glenn suggests that it is time to start preparing ourselves. A cyber attack could be every bit as devastating as an EMP, and in a world run by computers, nothing is safe.

Biological assault

WPA Pool / Pool | Getty Images

Don't trust the "experts." That was the takeaway many of us had from the pandemic, but something less talked about is the revelation that China has manufactured viruses that are capable of spreading across the globe. We now know that the lab leak hypothesis is true and that the Wuhan lab manufactured the virus that infected the entire world. That was only ONE virus from ONE lab. Imagine what else the enemies of America might be cooking up.

The government is WAGING WAR against these 3 basic needs

NICHOLAS KAMM / Contributor | Getty Images

The government has launched a full-on assault against our basic needs, and people are starting to take notice.

As long-time followers of Glenn are probably aware, our right to food, water, and power is under siege. The government no longer cares about our general welfare. Instead, our money lines the pockets of our politicians, funds overseas wars, or goes towards some woke-ESG-climate-Great Reset bullcrap. And when they do care, it's not in a way that benefits the American people.

From cracking down on meat production to blocking affordable power, this is how the government is attacking your basic needs:

Food

Fiona Goodall / Stringer | Getty Images

Glenn had Rep. Thomas Massie on his show where he sounded the alarm about the attack on our food. The government has been waging war against our food since the thirties when Congress passed the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1938. They started by setting strict limits on how many crops a farmer could grow in a season and punishing anyone who grew more—even if it was intended for personal use, not for sale on the market. This sort of autocratic behavior has continued into the modern day and has only gotten more draconian. Today, not only are you forced to buy meat that a USDA-approved facility has processed, but the elites want meat in general off the menu. Cow farts are too dangerous to the environment, so the WEF wants you to eat climate-friendly alternatives—like bugs.

Water

ALESSANDRO RAMPAZZO / Contributor | Getty Images

As Glenn discussed during a recent Glenn TV special, the government has been encroaching on our water for years. It all started when Congress passed the Clean Water Act in 1972, which gave the government the ability to regulate large bodies of water. As the name suggests, the act was primarily intended to keep large waterways clear of pollution, but over time it has allowed the feds to assume more and more control over the country's water supply. Most recently, the Biden administration attempted to expand the reach of the Clean Water Act to include even more water and was only stopped by the Supreme Court.

Electricity