Leftist Media Caught planting lies, again.

[The Professor]

B-b-b-but, you rw's said that was okay when O'Keefe/Britebart did it. rw's also said that it was rally libs who did it in order to cast doubt on the veracity of O'Keefe/Britebart's "journalistic honesty".

Bottom line is its wrong for either side to twist facts to suit their agenda. That's why libs don't respect fox/lush/beck etc.

From the article, the real crux of the discussion -

"We're all entitled to our own opinion and I respect their opinions and their thoughts," Heslin continued after the incident. "I wish they'd respect mine and give it a little bit of thought, and realize it could have been their child that could have been in that school that day."

That was NOT the crux of the discussion, and if you had watched the entire video you would have know this. Those words you quoted would have never been uttered except for the fact that the father of the slain victim screwed up - royally. He asked the audience a question anticipating that no one could possibly answer him, and was surprised when someone actually did. Realizing that he was wrong, he attempted to recoup by saying that he respected the opinions of others – even though he originally challenged how anyone could possibly have such an opinion.

The father made the following comment which was actually in the form of a question:

“I ask if there is anyone who is in this room that can give me one reason or challenge this question: Why anybody in this room needs to have done of these assault-style weapons or military weapons or high capacity clips?” He then looked to his left where people were seated. He paused, and getting no response he then said, “Not one person can answer the question.”

At this point several people in the room then gave a very brief response to the question. The father apparently thought that no one could possibly contradict him and he was wrong. Realizing that he made a mistake, he attempted to recoup by saying that he respected the opinions of others – even though he originally challenged how anyone could possibly have such an opinion.

It is obvious that the father thought his opinion is the only one that counts and had to backpedal a little bit.

By the way, the "crux" of the hearing was that there is no reason for anyone to possess what is commonly referred to as "assault weapons." The "crux" of the father's testimony was that "my son died solely because there was no ban on assault weapons." Personally, I don't see any other cruxes. There was certainly no "crux" regarding the respect of those with differing opinions.

In the final analysis, the only thing of importance is that the MSM lied, and far too many people believed them. That is the crux of the matter.

 

[Foxfyre]

The media can't stop lying. Has George Zimmerman ever got an apology for that selective editing? How about George Bush. Did Dan Rather ever apologize. This won't stop the left from lying. Next they'll be making up entire stories out of nothing. Maybe they'll stage events to have something to say with participants coming right out of central casting. Oh, wait. They did that with people said to be Sandy hurricane evacuees.

Lame stream journalists have become Jayson Blair clones.

It is also pervasive through most of the MSM, is deliberate, and so cleverly done that those who WANT people and groups on the right to be the villains don't even see it. Or don't care.

Sometimes one extenuating fact would totally change the perception they want people to have. So they bury it so deep in the story that they know most people won't ever read that far. Or they leave it out altogether.

They also know that most people don't read beyond the headlines so the headline will be brutally accusatory and not be pertinent to the actual story at all.

They know people do look at pictures, so they seek the most flattering and 'warm fuzzy or other emotion evoking photos for people or concepts they want to promote, and choose the most unflattering or compromising photos for those they want to attack. Or as Reuters did when it wanted to promote some sympathy for Hezbollah when it attacked Israel, it photo shopped a photo to add the appearance of much more smoke and destruction on Lebanon's side than what actually occurred.

If the story is negative regarding a Republican, the make sure to put an "R" after the name in the story. If it is negative regarding a Democrat, they rarely put a "D" after the name.

If they must compliment a conservative or Republican they make sure to incorporate something negative, however unrelated, in the same or adjacent paragraph. They do not do that to a liberal or Democrat.

And there are certain code words that are used as adjectives for those they want to promote, and for those they want to criticize or diminish or accuse.

It is absolutely shameless and would have been grounds for immediate dismissal if we had even hinted at all that a generation ago. And now I honestly believe they teach and demand reporters and editors to operate that dishonestly.

 

[Foxfyre]

If it was not for the internet with sharp eyed folks spotting the photoshopped photos and ferreting out the facts the media doesn't want the public to have, we would be even more screwed. But there are some damn good detectives and reporters on the internet.

 

[Foxfyre]

I have to give kudos to Huffpo who while not exactly calling out MSNBC for their dishonesty re the heckler, but are honestly reporting it.

MSNBC Criticized For Editing Of Newtown Gun Hearing (VIDEO)

I am slowly gaining a grudging respect for Huffpo who has been doing more of this kind of reporting lately. They still use what I consider too many falsely leading headlines, etc. and still relish catching a conservative in a bad light, but maybe, just maybe the worm is actually turning?

 

[WillowTree]

George Zimmerman is going to sue MSNBC and he's going to win.

 

[WillowTree]

MSNBC,, aren't they the ones with that black chick on there calling everyone on the conservative side "crazy crackers" what a racist. Will they correct her for it doyathink?

 

[Charles_Main]

B-b-b-but, you rw's said that was okay when O'Keefe/Britebart did it. rw's also said that it was rally libs who did it in order to cast doubt on the veracity of O'Keefe/Britebart's "journalistic honesty".

Bottom line is its wrong for either side to twist facts to suit their agenda. That's why libs don't respect fox/lush/beck etc.

From the article, the real crux of the discussion -

"We're all entitled to our own opinion and I respect their opinions and their thoughts," Heslin continued after the incident. "I wish they'd respect mine and give it a little bit of thought, and realize it could have been their child that could have been in that school that day."

Please post some evidence of RWings saying it was ok. Or shut your filthy worthless left wing, Lying pie hole.