From today's London Times:

SCIENTISTS at the University of East Anglia (UEA) have admitted throwing away much of the raw temperature data on which their predictions of global warming are based.

It means that other academics are not able to check basic calculations said to show a long-term rise in temperature over the past 150 years.

The UEA's Climatic Research Unit (CRU) was forced to reveal the loss following requests for the data under Freedom of Information legislation.

The data were gathered from weather stations around the world and then adjusted to take account of variables in the way they were collected. The revised figures were kept, but the originals -- stored on paper and magnetic tape -- were dumped to save space when the CRU moved to a new building.

Five things to take away here:

1. Climate change studies the world over are based upon research done at UEA's Climate Research Unit.
2. UEA's Climate Research Unit has been fudging their numbers to show warming trends not otherwise found in the data.
3. UEA dumped all of the raw data from which they derived their "adjusted" data so no one can go back and try to duplicate the results of their research.
4. Trillions and trillions of tax dollars hang in the balance based upon the "findings" of UEA's CRU and any other research based upon those findings.
5. You've seen virtually nothing about all of this in the mainstream press.

The precursor to today's internet (ArpaNet) was designed and built by the Department of Defense to detect damage in the system and to route vital information around the damaged node to keep that information flowing.

There is no way to look at today's mainstream national press other than as a damaged node.

From Carol Marin at the Chicago Sun-Times:

The press corps, most of us, don't even bother raising our hands any more to ask questions because Obama always has before him a list of correspondents who've been advised they will be called upon that day.

We reporters have earned our own membership in the Bizarro universe.

Who are we, after all? The ones rapid-firing at Rod Blagojevich with tough questions until we drive him from the room? Or the Miss Manners crowd, silent until called upon, quietly accepting that only a handful of questions will be taken at a time?

Frankly? You are both. And which person of interest gets the hard questions and which gets the softballs depends primarily upon their party affiliation AND/OR said person's effect on the agenda of that party.

Aaaaah, but Blogojevich is a Democrat, you say!

Not even a good try.

The only...ONLY...reason Blagojevich is getting the rough treatment from the press is because his activities are kicking mud up onto their anointed savior, the President-Elect. Charles Rangel is hip-deep on an elephant in financial scandals of different varieties (pay for play, tax fraud...you name it) and not only is the press generally uninterested, the Democrat controlled House won't pursue any meaningful investigation of Rangel's illegal and fraudulent activities. Worse still, they have rescinded the term limits that would have removed this weapons-grade crook from his Chairmanship of the Ways and Means Committee with no action required.

Press Reaction: Move along. Nothing to see here.

Chicago and its political mores are well-known to the point that "Chicago Politics" is a punch line to almost any discussion concerning crooked office-holders. Which is precisely why the mainstream Press didn't send anyone to Chicago to dig for dirt before the election. Wasilla, Alaska, was not spared so. There was a reporter in every dumpster...alive, unfortunately...within six blocks of the Palin household searching for any morsel of a scandal that could be tied to a candidate whose chief "failing" (at least theoretically) was that she was inexperienced.

The now clearly insane Andrew Sullivan still clutches to the theory that Trig Palin is actually the son of Sarah Palin's daughter Bristol. Yes, the Bristol Palin that just had a baby the other day....only 8 or so months after the birth of Trig. And the Atlantic Monthly still pays him to do this kind of work.

So while the press turns Alaska upside down looking for any hint of.....um....inexperience, they don't show up in Chicago at all before the election and are only there now because Blagojevich is doing damage to the party and to Barack Obama's image and he must be destroyed.

The mainstream press is completely in the tank for the *cough* progressive agenda in general and the Democrat party in particular. They are not even in denial about that anymore.

Which is not to say that they are no longer in denial of some sort.

Now what the Mainstream Press has deluded themselves into thinking is that their lack of objectivity combined with their ever-decreasing work ethic, overall writing and reporting skills, and their total dearth of knowledge in any area outside of the daily operations of a media outfit isn't what is causing them to go broke at break-neck speed.

It is because of the internet.....or because their readers are failing them. Or something.

It just can't be that the product is defective.

This in a Presidential election year. It looks as though there may be an upcoming glut in the market of *cough* unlicensed plumbers......or former journalists. Call them what you want.

Last week we saw reports of the decline in viewership of the major news networks. This in a year featuring a profoundly historic election by anyone's account.

Today from Editor & Publisher Magazine:

For those holding out for some improvement in print circulation, this morning brings disappointment. The Audit Bureau of Circulations released the latest figures for the six- month period ending September 2008 and the report shows major drops in circulation at the big metros.

According to ABC for the 507 newspapers reporting in this period, daily circulation slipped 4.6% to 38,165,848 copies. For the 571 papers, Sunday dropped 4.8% to 43,631,646 copies.

Newsrooms are cutting staff. NBC itself is slashing almost $500 million in expenses to remain profitable.

Obviously, many, many major media outlets are either over the edge or just on it.

And instead of doing any real and even-handed reporting, we know that these news outlets are In The Tank for the Dems in general and Obama in particular. And while this may work for the Dems and Obama this time around these news outlets are extremely vulnerable now.

I know that many conservatives (or even just fans of real reporting) are fed up and say that they don't "get their news" from their paper. I know I don't rely on the local for the news. But I still do for, say, the Obits and local sports. Even the classifieds. So while I don't at all rely on the paper for news I still subscribe for the print version.

So what would happen if everyone in the same situation decided that we would just rely on these news outlets' online versions for the local things that we need for a while?

Cancel the print subscription. Read the web version to get the local news, local sports, local classifieds, etc.

They are on the edge.

Let's give them a gentle nudge.

The Drudge headline says it all:

VP DEBATE MODERATOR RELEASING 'AGE OF OBAMA' BOOK ON INAUGURATION DAY

When 90% of the media votes Democratic I can almost see why it is hard to find someone to moderate the debate who is even close to undecided....but wouldn't it have been prudent to at the very least select someone as a moderator who didn't have a direct financial interest in Obama winning the election?

I news that I am sure is unrelated, viewership of the three big network newscasts this far....a presidential election year featuring two historic candidates....is down from last year.

From Breitbart.com:

CHICAGO (AP) - Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama said Monday the upheaval on Wall Street was "the most serious financial crisis since the Great Depression" and blamed it on policies that he said Republican rival John McCain supports.

"This country can't afford another four years of this failed philosophy," Obama said after the shock-wave announcements that financial giant Lehman Brothers was filing for Chapter 11 bankruptcy while titan Merrill Lynch was being bought by Bank of America for about $50 billion.

I am pretty sure that Mr. Obama would blame the recent failure of both Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae on Republicans also.

I have to say that the evidence squares nicely with Mr. Obama's side of the story.

Because you have to figure that if the Republicans had been getting lots and lots of campaign moolah from Lehman and Freddie and Fannie (like Mr. Obama) that they would have taken a lot more interest in the welfare of those companies (like Mr. Obama)...and then maybe those companies would not have failed.

Or something.

From Opensecrets.org:

In the current Congress, 271 lawmakers have collected nearly $3 million [from Lehman and related entities] since 1989, with 72 percent going to Democrats. Democratic presidential candidates and senators Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama top the list of all-time recipients for the company, collecting $410,000 and $395,600 respectively.

Let's have a quick Household Name Death Match:

Ken Lay, CEO of Enron, who drove Enron into the ditch and was manipulating markets before George Bush even left the Texas statehouse.

Jim Johnson, former actual Obama campaign big (from Wikipedia):

From 1991 to 1998, he served as chairman and chief executive officer of the Federal National Mortgage Association (Fannie Mae), the quasi-public organization that guarantees mortgages for millions of American homeowners. Previously, he was vice chairman of Fannie Mae (1990-1991) and a managing director with Lehman Brothers (1985-1990).

[snip]

On May 22, 2008, Democratic Party officials confidentially divulged that Obama had asked Johnson "to lead the process" for selecting Obama's running mate. On June 4, 2008, Obama announced the formation of a three person committee to vet vice presidential candidates, including Johnson. However, Johnson soon became a source of controversy when it was reported that he had received loans directly from Angelo Mozilo, the CEO of Countrywide Financial, a company implicated in the U.S. subprime mortgage lending crisis. Although he was not accused of any wrongdoing and was initially defended by Obama on the grounds that he was simply an unpaid volunteer, Johnson announced he would step down from the vice-presidential vetting position on June 11, 2008 in order to avoid being a distraction to Obama's campaign.

No contest. Ken Lay.

Meanwhile, the national mainstream press is hard at work in Wasilla, Alaska on an anonymous tip they received that Sarah Palin was juicing on steroids during her high school state basketball championship run.

[Emphasis in quotes above are mine]

What the Wasilla Warrior Hockey web page says above is:

Its probably too little too late but I have temporarily removed links to all roster information and photos. I wish that I had known how to do this four days ago, maybe it would have saved some heartache. I am sorry for any photos or information that slipped out to the media before I locked up this information.

Once the media tires of Wasilla, I will return the website to its fullest and we can all move forward with the new season.

Hot Air has more on this. Including the information that the Anchorage Daily News is getting calls from the media asking if Palin cheated her way to victory in the Miss Wasilla Pageant in 1984.

And had I been the webmaster for Wasilla Warrior Hockey, here is the web page that would probably have gotten me fired.

The media's reaction to Sarah Palin has been visceral. A media that once really did consider the children of candidates off limits is willing to plaster three THREE! stories of 17-year old Bristol Palin's pregnancy on the front page of the New York freakin' Times on the same day in order to destroy the candidacy of Sarah Palin and, by extension, John McCain.

Certainly, the media was in the tank for John Kerry the last time around, with one noted media type (I can't remember who) stating that media bias was worth 12 points to Kerry.

And the media this year is in the tank for the Democratic nominee at an unprecedented level. And they will not just be operating with the usual imbalance of positive/negative coverage. It is going to be unbelievably nasty.

Don't believe me? The news of Bristol Palin's pregnancy is about 3 days old. In the next couple of days you will even begin to see 'news' or at least be seeing information on Levi Whatshisname, the 17 year-old father.

Contrast that with the media embargo on John Edwards' affair and the love child that was conceived...and even today just the trickle of information regarding money funneled to his paramour through his large donors. All to, you know.....protect Elizabeth.

But just being in the tank for Obama doesn't quite explain it. Even if you take into consideration the very real historic nature of a truly viable (and nominated) black candidate for the Presidency.

Sarah Palin's nomination to be the Vice President isn't quite as big a "first" unless she wins...but take a look at the usual media talking heads...especially some of the women and look at how they are using arguments on camera against Sarah Palin as Vice President (shouldn't she take care of her kids, etc.?) that if uttered off-camera by a man against any media-approved female candidate would be an absolute career-ender. Have any woman describe to you the outright cattiness and meanness that frequently consumes an all-woman office. Then multiply it by a thousand and you have Sally Quinn and Andrea Mitchell...and Andrew Sullivan for that matter, 'reporting' on Sarah Palin.

But it still seems odd that they would so willingly and easily go on their search and destroy mission for 17 year-old Bristol Palin. So is there something else?

Maybe there is.

Maybe it is all of the above compounded by the thought that this may their last big chance to swing an election. Looking at the decline of readership and earnings at the New York Times herself you can't say logically say that she will have even the same influence (much less more) on future campaigns. The MSM's outright monopoly on news is gone and their influence will continue to wane over the next four years.

Maybe they know, consciously or unconsciously, that this might be their last hurrah.