Posts Tagged ‘dishonorable media’

I feel bad for the people who were killed and wounded in Arizona, I really do, but the idea that a person who was shot, who never knew the shooter, who didn’t hear the shooter make any declaration knows what drove him is pretty loose.

I gave a pass to some of the friends of the victims on the day of the shooting. Their friends and/or family had been shot and/or killed and emotions were high, but as the evidence continues to show the shooter had absolutely no connection to anything remote resembling the tea party, Sarah Palin or the like, the media’s attempt to continue to assert this is frankly libelous. Then again this is from the actual day of the shooting when facts were not in evidence.

Of course as Aaron Worthing of Patterico’s Pontifications points out:

notice what he doesn’t say. He doesn’t say he presently blames Palin, Beck, and so on for the attack. He is saying he did Saturday night. And of course that was the same night that Sheriff Nifong Dupnick was making his own intemperate remarks. So is it reasonable for the Mr. Fuller to have believed law enforcement on that issue on that night? Of course it is.

But you never hear them ask the obvious follow up question: do you still feel this way? And if you look at the rest of the report, created today, it is obvious that these people are completely dishonest. They have deliberately skewed every other piece of evidence to indict the right wing, leaving out every piece of evidence that might exonerate their targets. Why should we think they presented this man’s entire statement?

The use of “Democracy Now” (or as I like to call them ANSWER tv) as a primary source is always dubious to begin with but I guarantee you that will not stop the MSM for playing this for all its worth. This nearly guarantees that Morning Joe will be unwatchable for next week as politico is running with it and David Frum is already trying to weld it as a club. Way to go Dave, stand bravely cowering behind a man with a hole shot in him. Pretty low stuff.

The game is of course to play the Cindy Sheehan “Absolute moral authority” game. The left made Sheehan a national figure until she became a liability at which she was abandoned as a crazy. The goal of course is to bait us on the right to bait the right to hit the poor old fellow.

Bill Jacobson (who will be my guest on DaTechGuy on DaRadio on Feb 19th) gets it:

I wish you a speedy recovery, but you are wrong for all the reasons most of the rest of the world has come to understand in the last few days.

P.S., yes, you will be used by those who will hide behind your victim-status since they have no facts to support their theories

I feel really sorry for the man, the shooter used his blood to make himself famous and now the left and the media will use to try to salvage a meme they can’t support with facts. Disgraceful.

Meanwhile Stacy McCain, not taking the “attack the victim” bait, takes the trouble to use the shooters own words to make the case against:

  1. Jared Lee Loughner didn’t like ”illegal wars,” which are “unconstitutional,” an opinion you might have heard a lot circa 2002-2006 if you were hanging out with smelly peaceniks at International A.N.S.W.E.R. marches or Ned Lamont rallies.
  2. Jared Lee Loughner habitually used the term “genocide” to describe anything he was against – “Mom, this broccoli-and-cheese casserole tastes like genocide!” — just like every Chomsky-spouting punk who ever protested an Ann Coulter speech on a college campus.
  3. Jared Lee Loughner’s interpretation of the Constitution is nearly as crazy as the majority opinion in Lawrence v. Texas.
  4. Jared Lee Loughner hates cops, considers grammar a form of “mind control,” and felt that getting a “B” in class was a violation of his First Amendment rights. If he hadn’t become a mass murderer, he might have had a promising future as an ACLU lawyer.

You can find the video here.

The irony of course is the wars and genocide stuff would fit perfectly within the program schedule of Democracy Now.

Funny old world isn’t it?

Update: Apparently he isn’t being used, he is apparently out there bigtime:

Toward the end of the town hall meeting Saturday morning, one of the shooting victims, J. Eric Fuller, took exception to comments by two of the speakers: Ariz. state Rep. Terri Proud, a Dist. 26 Republican, and Tucson Tea Party spokesman Trent Humphries.

According to sheriff’s deputies at the scene, Fuller took a photo of Humphries and said, “You’re Dead.”

Deputies immediately escorted Fuller from the room.

Pima County Sheriff’s spokesman Jason Ogan said later Saturday that Fuller has been charged with threats and intimidation and he also will be charged with disorderly conduct.

I think the left’s script for Monday has just changed.

Update 2: Stacy Reports that the left is playing the “Post Traumatic” card. In terms of my personal feelings, I’m willing to give him more of a break in culpability, but in terms of the law, that pity is irrelevant you can’t just let stuff like that go. Or as Spock once said: “I do not approve, I understand.”

On facebook Sarah Palin puts out a video that first talks about the victims:

There is a bittersweet irony that the strength of the American spirit shines brightest in times of tragedy. We saw that in Arizona. We saw the tenacity of those clinging to life, the compassion of those who kept the victims alive, and the heroism of those who overpowered a deranged gunman.

Then quoting Ronald Reagan

President Reagan said, “We must reject the idea that every time a law’s broken, society is guilty rather than the lawbreaker. It is time to restore the American precept that each individual is accountable for his actions.” Acts of monstrous criminality stand on their own. They begin and end with the criminals who commit them, not collectively with all the citizens of a state, not with those who listen to talk radio, not with maps of swing districts used by both sides of the aisle, not with law-abiding citizens who respectfully exercise their First Amendment rights at campaign rallies, not with those who proudly voted in the last election.

Then hits the media about responsibility:

Vigorous and spirited public debates during elections are among our most cherished traditions. And after the election, we shake hands and get back to work, and often both sides find common ground back in D.C. and elsewhere. If you don’t like a person’s vision for the country, you’re free to debate that vision. If you don’t like their ideas, you’re free to propose better ideas. But, especially within hours of a tragedy unfolding, journalists and pundits should not manufacture a blood libel that serves only to incite the very hatred and violence they purport to condemn. That is reprehensible.

And quotes some history:

There are those who claim political rhetoric is to blame for the despicable act of this deranged, apparently apolitical criminal. And they claim political debate has somehow gotten more heated just recently. But when was it less heated? Back in those “calm days” when political figures literally settled their differences with dueling pistols?

And celebrates America:

Public discourse and debate isn’t a sign of crisis, but of our enduring strength. It is part of why America is exceptional.

No one should be deterred from speaking up and speaking out in peaceful dissent, and we certainly must not be deterred by those who embrace evil and call it good. And we will not be stopped from celebrating the greatness of our country and our foundational freedoms by those who mock its greatness by being intolerant of differing opinion and seeking to muzzle dissent with shrill cries of imagined insults.

And a defense of liberty:

It is in the hour when our values are challenged that we must remain resolved to protect those values. Recall how the events of 9-11 challenged our values and we had to fight the tendency to trade our freedoms for perceived security. And so it is today.

A thought provoking speech so how does Morning Joe react? They attack her for the use of the words “BlOOD LIBEL”. Ignoring that for two days the phrase has been used in this context:

The Arizona Tragedy and the Politics of Blood Libel

That’s Glenn Reynolds (my guest this Saturday) on the media and the shootings. One of the most important bloggers in the world two days ago in the Wall Street Journal. It was quoted widely, but I didn’t remember the media hitting him over it.

But this is Sarah Palin, she who must be stopped. Apparently like the gift of flowers there is no occasion where attacking Sarah Palin is not proper, additionally the media had hit her for saying nothing, now they say she should be quiet.

Morning Joe followed up with Tim Pawlenty who failed to reject the “target” nonsense. This unwillingness to reject this meme has not only confirmed that I will not support him, but also means I will happily work against him. That’s not what a leader does.

Does this surprise me? No, I’m not surprised. Anyone watching the full statement can describe it in one word Presidential. President Obama’s statement will be held in comparison against it and it will be a tough act to follow.

And here is my conclusion/opinion. The “No Labels” crowd Morning Joe, David Frum, Andrew Sullivan crowd is using this incident and the blood of the dead and wounded to attempt to silence and put conservative voices that they consider “dangerous” on the defensive, voices they can’t beat in the court of public opinion or in the ballot box. I would call that Blood Libel.

If they are not ashamed of themselves they ought to be if they are capable.

Update: Tell me: if an unapologetic liberal lawyer who is also Jewish says Sarah Palin’s use of the term Blood Libel isn’t inappropriate can we let it go?

I myself have used it to describe false accusations against the State of Israel by the Goldstone Report. There is nothing improper and certainly nothing anti-Semitic in Sarah Palin using the term to characterize what she reasonably believes are false accusations that her words or images may have caused a mentally disturbed individual to kill and maim. The fact that two of the victims are Jewish is utterly irrelevant to the propriety of using this widely used term.

Will that do?

Yesterday it was announced a great American, Dick Winters Major of Easy Company, Normandy vet and the commander of the 101st airborne paratroopers who were immortalized as the “band of brothers” died at the age of 92.

As a gentleman of advanced age whose past was well known it is very likely that the majority of his obituary was written quite a while ago with a few things added to cover any new events that might have happened. This is quite normal when a narrative is already known.

When I look at the media reaction in Arizona it is plain that the obituaries of those who were killed were written a long time ago.

The left has been writing the narrative that the tea party is a violent extremist group and that Sarah Palin is toxic. The have attempted and failed over and over to paint the tea party as racists, bigots, gun nuts and people outside the mainstream of political thought. As their failure became plain they took comfort that, although the public didn’t understand how dangerous the Tea Party is they did and sooner or later something would happen to prove it.

So their commentaries and their stories lay dormant until a suitable event could come around an event that would reverse their fortunes and be, as described in Time: Barack Obama’s Oklahoma City moment.

When Jared Loughner fired his shots on Saturday Liberal pundits were sure they have their story. The person shot was a democrat who voted for Obamacare, he lived in a state where the gun laws were loose, and her opponent was a tea party favorite, it HAD to be true.

So the media pulled out their obits, filled in the blank names and told their story confident that events would prove it true.

Alas what a difference 48 hours makes, from the accusations of the shooter being a military vet to his connection to tea party rhetoric, each meme collapsed under the weight of facts until they were reduced to pointing to maps and and trying to restrain “both sides”.

Simple mathematics suggest that if you bet on a a particular number on a roulette wheel continually sooner or later it will come up, however if it comes up after you have lost over and over again, it is not proof of your gambling prowess.

Likewise the left will pull back and keep their obituary columns in reserve waiting for that one moment to bring them out again as a weapon, and they will prove just as wise as the gambler above.

Update: Stacy Links and irony of ironies includes a picture of him in my well traveled fedora at the wheel in Vegas.

“Introspection” was one of those MSNBC drinking-game words yesterday — evidently they got the memo from Paul Begala — and yet it never occurs to people like that to look inside themselves and question the root causes of their anti-Republican, anti-conservative, anti-Tea Party prejudices.

As I sit here this morning, with my office TV tuned to MSNBC, Joe Scarborough is rambling on about Glenn Beck and Michelle Bachmann and Fox News. No matter how wrong his liberal friends have been, Joe knows in his heart that liberals aren’t the problem. No, the real problem is those Republicans who have stubbornly refused to recognize the moral superiority of Joe Scarborough.

Just bet on black one more time, Joe. Your lucky number is way overdue. And you’ve only got to be right once.

(Hope my fedora did well in Vegas) Also included some fixes in grammar.

Update 2: Instalanche, hi guys take a peek around and don’t forget Glenn will be the guest on my radio show DaTechGuy on DaRadio this Saturday at 9:00 p.m. on WCRN AM 830 in Worcester 50,000 Watts reaching all of New England and beyond. (There is still a little ad time left as well). and if you are a NE Blogger join me tonight for a bloggers meeting at Linguini’s Italian Eatery route 20 Marlborough (take the route 20 west exit off 495) tonight at 7 p.m. to talk about a few things.

Update 3: Welcome Hillbuzz readers, you might be interested in my examiner column of today. Money quote:

The shooter in Arizona will likely cop an insanity plea for his actions. No word if the left will do the same for theirs.

I didn’t hit the sack till 3 so I missed most of the first hour and a half of Morning Joe but the line I heard was similar to a couple of liberal hosts I heard on the radio this morning.

The gist was: We aren’t saying Sarah Palin is responsible but look at this cross hairs and the rhetoric being used. Politico was particularly not covering itself with glory and Mika seemed to egg on Tom Brokaw in the imagery business.

If Byron York was watching doubtless he would be feeling nostalgic because today he notes what Bill Clinton did to turn the attack in Oklahoma City to his political advantage:

Later, under the heading “How to use extremism as issue against Republicans,” Morris told Clinton that “direct accusations” of extremism wouldn’t work because the Republicans were not, in fact, extremists. Rather, Morris recommended what he called the “ricochet theory.” Clinton would “stimulate national concern over extremism and terror,” and then, “when issue is at top of national agenda, suspicion naturally gravitates to Republicans.”

As York notes this morning this is exactly the line Democrats in a political hole right now are trying to play.

One veteran Democratic operative, who blames overheated rhetoric for the shooting, said President Barack Obama should carefully but forcefully do what his predecessor did.

“They need to deftly pin this on the tea partiers,” said the Democrat. “Just like the Clinton White House deftly pinned the Oklahoma City bombing on the militia and anti-government people.”

Another Democratic strategist said the similarity is that Tucson and Oklahoma City both “take place in a climate of bitter and virulent rhetoric against the government and Democrats.”

Lets cut to the chase, tough talk has been the political rule in the US since 1789 and before. Nuts are going to be nuts no matter what. The idea of watching out for “inflammatory” rhetoric is yet another attempt to suppress speech. No amount of speech restriction is going to make a dangerous nut any less dangerous.

Who decides what rhetoric is “inflammatory”? The eastern elites? The same media that had nothing to say about the nasty Anti-Bush stuff until he was out of office? The same media who didn’t say boo when we see signs in marches that say. “Behead those who oppose Islam” or “We support our troops when they shoot their officers?“. For some reason until the Bush years were over this was not a topic the media (other than fox) choose to bring up.

Look for the passive aggressive business for a while. It’s the left and the media best chance to put conservatives on the defensive without actually doing anything to actually earn support by positive action. Watch for it also be used to attempt to restrict 1st and 2nd amendment rights.