Things You Hear on NPR: No Idea How Anyone Could Think DACA Was Unconstitutional

NPR on DACA:

Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, as it’s officially known, has broad support across the political spectrum. The majority of Democrats and Republicans tell pollsters that they support protections for immigrants who were brought to the U.S. illegally as children — called DREAMers.

Things You Hear on NPR: Kavanaugh Guilty until Proven Innocent

Well, this is just embarrassing.  NPR this morning had Kavanaugh supporter Sara Fagen on, but the “interviewer” was quick to respond to everything the guest said with “Although,” followed by various tendentious arguments for the Democrats’ narrative.  This isn’t an interview; it’s a debate.

Penultimately, the NPR interviewer made this brazen argument:

Things You Hear on NPR: If the Person You’re Interviewing Doesn’t Give You Quite the Quote You Wanted, Just Go Ahead and Say It for Him

NPR this morning, “reporting” on immigration policy (getting less subtle in its advocacy for one side and its chosen narrative):

[NPR’s Steve] INSKEEP: So for that symbolic prosecution, they’ve been diverting from drug cases. I get that. But I’m remembering when Jeff Sessions announced this policy. He didn’t say to prosecutors across the country, abandon drug prosecutions. He said prosecute everybody. And if you need more resources, let us know. Have prosecutors been getting more resources to handle these border-crossing cases?

Things You Hear on NPR: Overturning Marriage Laws Something to Celebrate, but Voting Reforms ‘Controversial’

Here’s how NPR began its story today on the upholding of Ohio’s latest voting reform:

An ideologically split U.S. Supreme Court Monday upheld Ohio’s controversial “use-it-or-lose-it” voting law by a 5-to-4 margin.

Here are the corresponding openings of NPR’s top two stories (according to their own measures) about Obergefell, the 2015 Supreme Court decision that forced states to redefine marriage:

Things You Hear on NPR: ‘No Evidence’ of Clinton Foundation Influence Laundering

This is part of why we’re so annoyed about the liberal news media.  (Listen up, those of you who still don’t believe there is such a thing—I know you’re out there.)  This one isn’t just a little biased; this is either gross incompetence (difficult for NPR to plead—they’re not idiots, and they can do very good journalism when they want to) or infuriating, brazen dishonesty in the service of an agenda.

Things You Hear on NPR: Forget about Legislative Intent, Let’s Get Back to Bashing Republicans

The Supreme Court last week heard oral arguments in King v. Burwell, in which the plaintiffs argue that under the text of Obamacare, the government can provide subsidies and inflict penalties only on people in states that have set up state-run insurance exchanges.  Here is some of NPR’s coverage of the arguments.

Some of the ways you know that NPR knew they were producing political propaganda, not a news story:

1.  They bring Scott Walker into their arguments about legislative history.

Pew: ‘Consistent Liberals Most Likely to Block Others’ ‘because they disagreed with a political post’

This is not news (see “Liberals More than Twice as Likely to De-friend You for Disagreeing with Them”, from two and a half years ago), but it’s still interesting.  From the Pew Research Center (near the bottom of the page):

Hat tip to Hot Air, who also have a thoughtful exploration of the survey results and what they mean.

Consistent liberals are also the most likely faction to drop someone as a friend over politics, although their lead over consistent conservatives is more modest on that point (24 percent to 16 percent).

Update (October 21st, 2014): Edited title (still quoting Pew, different quote) to make clear why liberals are blocking people (not just vaguely “Based on Political Content”, but specifically “because they disagreed with a political post”).