There’s a swagger in her step as Cecile Richards conducts a book tour around the media surrounding her departure from the summit of Planned Parenthood after 12 years. Call it a victory lap. Everywhere she goes, adoring liberal interviewers ask her if she’ll run for office next. After all, it’s not like she has millions of little skeletons in her closet.

The liberal media’s favorite Christians are the liberal Christians, the ones who think there’s too much emphasis on abortion and homosexuality....and are fine with both. Time’s “Ten Questions” interview in the August 28 issue features "Texas pastor" Jen Hatmaker, a liberal author and blogger who’s horrified by Donald Trump and thinks evangelicals need to loosen up.

The pull quote in the magazine is this: “If we are following Christ literally, then nobody’s humanity is up for grabs. Nobody. That is a non-negotiable.” This is NOT a quote about abortion. It’s a quote about “LGBTQ issues.”

When it comes to covering the economy under President Obama, the broadcast networks have a habit of covering good economic news, but glossing over or ignoring bad economic news. It turns out coverage of income and poverty data from the Census got the same treatment with all three networks covering “great news” on Sept. 13, 2016. However, a year earlier only CBS Evening News covered the data showing stagnant income and poverty rates. Even that show waited days to report the news.

Melinda Gates is the ideal philanthropist in the eyes of the liberals at Time magazine – after all, she and her husband Bill Gates became Time’s Persons of the Year...about the same time they gave Time money for a health summit. Anyhow, Melinda was recently honored with the “Ten Questions” interview  with Belinda Luscombe in Time’s December 1 and 8 issue.

They promoted “The philanthropist on the importance of contraceptives, her daughters and her growing optimism.” Mrs. Gates lied to (or at best, misled) Time about her foundation's support for abortion advocates

Amanda Marcotte's crusade against stovetops continues apace. TIME magazine's Belinda Luscombe today picked up the baton from the Slate writer, grousing about how "We Need to Stop Guilting Parents into Cooking Dinner."

While less strident in tone than the ever-joyless Ms. Marcotte, Luscombe nevertheless has a flair for the melodramatic as she shares her annoyance at the prep time and serial ingratitude she gets for her culinary efforts.

Time’s Belinda Luscombe offered a somewhat tough “10 Questions” with the rapper Ice Cube for the June 23 issue. She asked how he could rap about being poor – “I’m squeezing the penny so hard a booger came out of Lincoln’s nose” – when he is very wealthy. She asked how much his young kids curse after listening to his music.

But the most interesting part was asking him how the Obama presidency is going. “Mr. Cube,” as she called him, was still totally down with Obama, and busting on whites not wanting to “play” with him in Washington:

In Time’s “Ten Questions” interview in the September 23 edition, Time editor-at-large Belinda Luscombe asked Hugh Jackman about his new movie “Prisoners,” in which “Your character tortures a guy to try to find his kidnapped daughter.” Luscombe asked if this instinct kicks when his children are faced with the paparazzi.

Then Belinda – like Jackman, a native of Australia – went geopolitical and suggested this freaked-out-daddy torturer character is an appropriate metaphor for the United States: 

It's not often that yours truly visits Huffington Post. One of those rare occasions occurred early today as I was preparing the post (at NewsBusters; at BizzyBlog) about South Carolina Democratic Party Chairman Dick Harpootlian relishing the idea that his party's candidate for Palmetto State Governor in 2014 might send current Republican Governor Nikki Haley "back to wherever the hell she came from."

In writing about Harpootlian's response to the controversy over his insensitive and arguably racist and nativist remark, HuffPo's Alana Horowitz, who serves as its Front Page Editor, wrote that Haley "is no stranger to scrutiny over her ethnic and religious background." To what sort of "scrutiny" did Horowitz refer involving Haley's "ethnic and religious background"? See after the jump:

When Time's Belinda Luscombe asked "Ten Questions" of actress Sigourney Weaver, it became clear they were going to discuss liberal activism as well as her Hillary-clone role on USA's Political Animals miniseries.

It started with this: "Which Secretary of State do you think would make the best actor?" Weaver replied: "Probably all of them. I think James Baker is a very interesting character. I'd rather see him as an actor than as Secretary of State." Then they turned to the Vietnam era: 

It's tough to believe this actually happened in the year 2012.

During an interview with South Carolina's Republican Governor Nikki Haley, Time magazine's editor-at-large Belinda Luscombe disgracefully said, "In New York City, which you're visiting for a couple of days, a lot of our taxi drivers are Sikhs. If you get one, are you going to give him a slightly bigger tip?"

Time magazine offered its "Ten Questions" interview to Chicago Mayor (and former Obama chief of staff) Rahm Emanuel, but Time's Belinda Luscombe largely stuck to light, airy questions like when the mayor talked of getting ideas on his swim, she asked, "Are you a Speedo or board-shorts kind of guy?" She also asked if he gets more sleep now, which kid was the favorite in his house growing up, and "Do you miss Oprah?"

Somehow, there wasn't space in Time for questions about Obama scandals like Solyndra or Fast and Furious, and when it briefly turned serious about national policy, Time pestered from the left about how Emanuel wasted that economic crisis he talked about:

UPDATE: The New York Times joined the fray as well with a similar article. 

Must be a slow news week. Both Time and the Washington Post reported yesterday on a rehashed two-year-old study about rising teen pregnancy rates.

"Pregnancy rates among U.S. teenagers," wrote Time's Belinda Luscombe, "which had been dropping since 1990, took an upturn in 2006, according to newly released data."

This "newly released data," however, is far from breaking news. The original study was actually published over two years ago by the Center for Disease Control and Prevention, and it got plenty of attention back then, including from the Washington Post. The study has since been given a little facelift by the liberal, anti-abstinence organization the Guttmacher Institute and has been re-released as shocking new data. So why did the Post and the Time even consider this newsworthy? The Post's Rob Stein unknowingly sandwiched the answer to that question in the middle of his article.