January 30, 2013

"How the left-wing media lied about Newtown 'hecklers.'"

Shameful.

136 comments:

edutcher said...

The media's been doing this sort of thing since the early Vietnam war protests.

So, we are surprised (or outraged), why?

Jay said...

They also lied about Romney's tax returns, the Bush Tax cuts, Obama's association with Reverend Wright, the TANG Memo's, Valerie Plame and a whole host of other shit.

virgil xenophon said...

ONCE AGAIN, edutcher beat me to the punch! Yes, I'm shocked, shocked I tell ya to find out there is gambling, er, the left does this..

Marshal said...

Since even the left's supporters know their public positions are lies they'll pay no price for it. By Any Means Necessary.

Colonel Angus said...

It's about pushing agendas and ideology. The "news" is just a means to an end.

Victor Erimita said...

Why haven't conservative billionaires bought up media, to counter this stuff? Surely not all our billionaires are crony capitalist oligarchs who promote the Regressive agenda in order to profit from government favoritism?

Mitchell the Bat said...

He should have been heckled for the photograph.

whoresoftheinternet said...

LMAO.

Do you really think ANY left wingers will read or retain this?

Please. They will continue to lie about this forever. Crimethink to do otherwise.

Truth isn't a potent antidote to those who simply deny reality, like leftists.

EMD said...

He wants to know why the Bushmaster is available for sale in Connecticut.

Would he rather his son be gunned down by a Glock?

Talk about missing the point. Adam Lanza was sick, and that is the problem. Not what brand or type of gun was used to exact his twisted reality.

virgil xenophon said...

The main take-away here is this latest example is yet another marker/indicator of the increasing brazenness of the MSM. They have now shed any pretense of neutrality and are embracing their full Joseph Goebbels..

Marshal said...

Jim Himes✔ @jahimes
Civility, decency must return.


It's a Who's Who? of leftist idiots.

Missed dear Jim when the left insinuated Romney killed a former employee's wife and Obama lied that President Bush refused to help Katrina victims because they were black.

It's sad some Americans really are this despicable. But it's not surprising at all.

Jay said...

Transcript:


“I ask if there’s anybody in this room that can give me one reason or challenge this question … why anybody in this room needs to have one of these assault-style weapons or military weapons or high-capacity clips. [Pause, waiting for response.] Not one person can answer that question.”


Audience members: ”[Unintelligible] Second Amendment shall not be infringed”


There was no "heclking" at all.

But, I would have pointed out to this man that the LA Riots and Hurricane Katrina remind us why an AR-15 is useful.

Otherwise, we don't have to explain "need" when we do rights in America.

Of course decades of dumbing down education has led us to the point where few people understand natural rights and many people believe the government actually grants rights.

edutcher said...

Sorry, virgil, I know how it feels when somebody posts your idea first.

Nonapod said...

We live in an age where an untruth can spread at lightspeed. Twitter has become a powerful crowdshaming tool. It's an amazing enhancer of impulsive groupthink kneejerk idiocy.

AJ Lynch said...

I got news for NBC's owner Comcast-in December, I cancelled my Comcast Triple Play service and transferred to Verizon as my way of refusing to give any of my money to NBC [which is now owned by Comcast].

I Callahan said...

The media's been doing this sort of thing since the early Vietnam war protests. So, we are surprised (or outraged), why?

Because it's way worse than back then, that's why.

Just a couple of weeks ago, the news director for CBS News wrote an op-ed on how to "destroy" the Republican party. Steve Kroft flat-out admits that he tossed Obama softball questions. Terry Moran tweeting that he doesn't think Rand Paul has any basis in speaking about foreign policy. The George Zimmerman tape edit.

Maybe it's the constant barrage of 24/7 news, blogs, social media, etc, but let's admit it: they're not even hiding it anymore.

The media are the single biggest threat to our country than anything else. You no longer have a free country when the media overwhelmingly sides with one side of the political divide.

I Callahan said...

Why haven't conservative billionaires bought up media, to counter this stuff?

Glenn Beck tried to buy Current TV. They wouldn't sell because of ideology, and they flat-out admitted it.

Sorun said...

Business as usual.

phx said...

"Shameful"
"And it’s utterly despicable."
_______________________________

You're dethpicable.

Kit said...

More irresponsible retweeting - Twitter's big negative. The positive side, though, is the speed in which it self-corrects.

BDNYC said...

I hope someone is keeping track, because the impression I get is that NBC and its affiliated news networks have a particularly bad history of manipulating footage, lying, etc. A few examples immediately come to mind: the George Zimmerman 9-1-1 call, the scrubbing of the black guy at a tea party rally to support the "whites only" narrative, and Romney's "WaWas" comment.

virgil xenophon said...

BTW, I happened to catch that snippy little bitch Alex Wagner yesterday on her show on MSNBC (know your enemy!) and she and the panelists were all snarkily holier-than-thou tut-tutting about the ABSOLUTELY beastly, beyond-the-pale actions of the troglodyte right as "demonstrated" by the vid clip in question.

Any odds that she has--or will--apologize? Ever? Let alone savage (no, the best that could be hoped for is a "more in sorrow than in anger" bit at best) those responsible in the name of professional academic fairness? You must be joking...Bueller? Bueller?

DADvocate said...

The ends justify the means, and their end is to impose their control over the rest of us.

EMD said...

I hope someone is keeping track, because the impression I get is that NBC and its affiliated news networks have a particularly bad history of manipulating footage, lying, etc. A few examples immediately come to mind: the George Zimmerman 9-1-1 call, the scrubbing of the black guy at a tea party rally to support the "whites only" narrative, and Romney's "WaWas" comment.

Um, GM truck bombs?

virgil xenophon said...

PS: "journalistic ethics"= oxymoron on steroids..

Writ Small said...

Ultimately, the issue here is Republicans saying stupid things. Given all the dumb things Republicans have said, who can blame the media for assuming the worst? Stop the crying and start saying only smart stuff.

phx said...

What difference does it make at this point? Eh?

I Callahan said...

Stop the crying and start saying only smart stuff.

Touche'

Jay said...


Um, GM truck bombs?


Yes, let's not forget that NBC actually blew up a car and tried to pretend it happened spontaneously.

Bryan C said...

When I was in high school, back in the 80's, one of our more interesting teachers showed us a short film demonstrating how the same raw footage could be edited to show two completely opposite events: Heroic police putting down a violent mob, vs peaceful citizens brutalized by crazed cops.

It was not a revelation to me, but it did make a very vivid impression. Now I think of it whenever someone mentions MSNBC.

whoresoftheinternet said...

@Writ Small:

When the lefts stupid sayings are 99% ignored or explained away by the left media, it's hardly a fair fight in that arena.

Enjoy the decline, nimrod!

EDH said...

Not only did the video give me the impression that he was not being heckled, I got the impression that every word he was saying was being listened to intently out of respect and understanding of his loss by everyone present.

He posited the question not once but twice. At that point, silence would have required not listening, not engaging.

The media message here is shut-up in the presence of "absolute moral authority" as conferred by the left.

Colonel Angus said...

The media's been doing this sort of thing since the early Vietnam war protests. So, we are surprised (or outraged), why?

Because it's way worse than back then, that's why.


Is that really the case or is it because of the Internet age we are now able to finally see through all the lies and bullshit?

Cronkite claimed we lost Vietnam after Tet when in reality the Viet Cong were crushed and never truly recovered. The equivalent would have been claiming defeat after the Battle of the Bulge when in really the German army on the Western front ceased to exist for all practical purposes.

When you have an agenda to push, the truth gives way to the agenda and liberals know how to do that better than anyone.

Marshal said...

Writ Small said...
Ultimately, the issue here is Republicans saying stupid things.


A sad attempt to normalize the bias. What's stupid about answering the guy's question after he turns to them and asks a second time?

Colonel Angus said...

What difference does it make at this point? Eh?

And I think phx's comment above, possibly meant to be flippiant, demonstrates the true divide in the country. He probably acknowledges the deception but when liberals view conservatives as the enemy rather than simply opponents or even rivals, I suppose the by any means necessary methods to truly destroy them are deemed acceptable.

Thus engagement is futile since they will only accept assimilation rather than an acceptance of a different viewpoint.

Apologies to non-Trek fans who missed the obvious.

Bill said...

What EDH said. They were hanging on his every word.

And if they hadn't responded to his challenge at all it would've been portrayed as a victory for gun control advocates because 2nd Amendment supporters would've been described as unable to come up with an answer.

Brew Master said...

Shameful?

Try, deliberate. This goes beyond shameful into insidious. The majority of media outlets are nothing more than propaganda arms for leftist views.

It is at this point impossible for views opposing modern progressivism to receive fair hearing. Modern progressive ideas will bring about the ruin of this country.

Are you prepared for Greece style civil unrest? It will come, the current crop of Pols can only delay it now, and in that delay, make the final outcome worse.

Colonel Angus said...

What's stupid about answering the guy's question after he turns to them and asks a second time?

Because it wasn't the answer they wanted to hear.

Brennan said...

It will be a shame if the Sandy Hook parents get hoodwinked into being pawns for the left the way the 9/11 Jersey Wives were.

But hey, maybe they want the travel expenditures and the media time rather then telling the media to go pound sand and let them grieve.

X said...

the Obama/Nakoula thing to do would be to jail some NBC employees for some infraction, any infraction. didn't David Gregory and some others at NBC break some law recently?

phx said...

And I think phx's comment above, possibly meant to be flippiant, demonstrates the true divide in the country. He probably acknowledges the deception but when liberals view conservatives as the enemy rather than simply opponents or even rivals, I suppose the by any means necessary methods to truly destroy them are deemed acceptable.

Absolutely flippant, Colonel. But you are wrong if you think I view conservatives as enemies rather than opponents, or that I subscribe to "any means necessary."

I think anyone would be hard-pressed to find an example in all my comments of being personally offended by conservatives or right-wingers as a group.

I rarely traffic in the judgmental language of my ideolgcial friends. Terms like "shameful" or "despicable" generally leave me cold or send me into mockery no matter who utters them.

AllenS said...

The usual suspects also bit on that picture of Obama sheetshooting. Haha. Then someone posted the original picture and it was him playing golf. Instead of a golf club, someone photoshopped a shotgun.

Rocketeer said...

Given all the dumb things Republicans have said, who can blame the media for assuming the worst? Stop the crying and start saying only smart stuff.

This is largely true, but is nonetheless hard to swallow given that Republicans don't even have a majority of market share between the two parties, much less a monopoly over Democrats, in saying stupid things.

Brennan said...

The usual suspects also bit on that picture of Obama sheetshooting. Haha. Then someone posted the original picture and it was him playing golf. Instead of a golf club, someone photoshopped a shotgun.

That's not true. The President golfs with a set of Ping Zing 12 guages. He one puts every green and hits a skeet at the same time. Impressive stuff, but you light worker and all that.

Levi Starks said...

Hitler's news media would never have done anything like this. Never.
We are nothing like Pre-WW2 Germany.
Not even close.
Don't even think about it.
Why the very notion is absurd I tell you.

Colonel Angus said...

Absolutely flippant, Colonel. But you are wrong if you think I view conservatives as enemies rather than opponents, or that I subscribe to "any means necessary."

But is it a matter to be flippant about? Assuming you are a proponent of strict gun control and bans, do you really believe such deception helps or hurts your cause?

Liberals like to mock the charge of there being a liberal media bias yet when examples like this occur, it seems the response is a wink and nod from the left.

Marshal said...

phx said...
I rarely traffic in the judgmental language of my ideolgcial friends. Terms like "shameful" or "despicable" generally leave me cold or send me into mockery no matter who utters them.


In truth this is more of phx's tactic of defending through attack. If he directly supports the media he has to admit he supports their hyocrisies and lies. So instead he attacks those criticizing the media but on some other basis. The result is both a defense of his ally and a change of topic - away from one damaging to his ally.

Brennan said...

Are you prepared for Greece style civil unrest? It will come, the current crop of Pols can only delay it now, and in that delay, make the final outcome worse.

I don't think it's prudent for this until we start seeing pictures of the President paid for with taxpayer money posted around the country. This is typically the tell that your country is going into the shitter.

Ironically, Illinois governors serving time in Federal Prison were really high on posting signs like that. "This Highway Graft is proudly supported by Governor Blagojevich". "This school graft is proudly supported by Governor Ryan."

Here was one of Rod's signs.
http://images.thetruthaboutcars.com/2010/04/GreenLanes.jpg

The President's stimulus bill came pretty close to this, but left off his name. A little brighter than most Illinois polls is this light worker.

https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRGj9LBfMu-rKve6bxLLDS1vJRWarhiTXh9JhCtxoOdcZqZeegh9A

Colonel Angus said...

The usual suspects also bit on that picture of Obama sheetshooting. Haha. Then someone posted the original picture and it was him playing golf. Instead of a golf club, someone photoshopped a shotgun.

Makes sense because that seemed a very odd pose for shooting skeet.

phx said...

Marshal you are truly cracked!

furious_a said...

Kudos to Slate for reviewing the full video, unequivocally stating their position, and making the full video available so readers could "...judge for yourself."

Michael said...

The truth is irrelevant. What is important is that the entire world that is given to this kind of thinking now knows that the father of a slain child was heckled. That is the main thing and the thing that tells the larger truth about those who would give the wrong answer to the father of a slain child.

CWJ said...

Without an agenda, Sandy Hook and its parents would no longer be a story.

This parent is being used. I hope he realises that. To me its somehow less sad to think that he believes people must justify why they need a specific something in order to excercize their constitutional rights than it is to think he believes that any of this is actually about his loss, grief, and opinions.

Brennan said...

Liberals like to mock the charge of there being a liberal media bias yet when examples like this occur, it seems the response is a wink and nod from the left.

Jon Chait admitted it. He did some actual research into Hollywood and the media. Low and behold he learned shit conservatives learned about in the 70s.

So Jon Chait knows now what Conservatives knew in the 70s. He's catching up.

Can't wait for the rest of his literati friends to learn how to do actual research.

furious_a said...

Why haven't conservative billionaires bought up media, to counter this stuff?

See "Newsweek" and also "Tribune Cos."

Also not that many Sheikh sugar-daddies to bail out cable losers like CurrentTV after Al Gore bailed.

MikeAdamson said...

Very polite hecklers I must say although loud enough to get the speaker's attention or else why would he keep turning to address them? I'd describe the stopry as overreaction rather than lying.

Colonel Angus said...

I rarely traffic in the judgmental language of my ideolgcial friends. Terms like "shameful" or "despicable" generally leave me cold or send me into mockery no matter who utters them.

Phx, do you not view the distortion of an event, in this case, stating a grieving father was heckled, by a major media player shameful and despicable?

Do you not think the editing of a 911 call to imply Zimmerman was motivated by race as shameful and despicable?

Jay said...

Given all the dumb things Republicans have said, who can blame the media for assuming the worst?

I'd love to hear 3 "dumb things" Republicans have allegedly said.

Just 3.

Brennan said...

This parent is being used. I hope he realises that. To me its somehow less sad to think that he believes people must justify why they need a specific something in order to excercize their constitutional rights than it is to think he believes that any of this is actually about his loss, grief, and opinions.

Mr. Heslin didn't have his facts right. I'm really not going to beat him up over that. He's probably just repeated what he's been told or heard that "assault weapons" used at Sandy Hook are the same used at Columbine(false), Virginia Tech(false), and Colorado Springs(false).

But he wasn't the only father of a victim to speak. Mark Mattioli testified as well. I thought Mark's testimony hit the finer points of where we go from here. Here was Fox News' edits of his testimony. Video editing can turn Hitler into Ghandi, an AR15 toting black man into a white man(MSNBC) and a gallery that answers a question into a gallery of hecklers(MSNBC), so take it for what it's worth.

Marshal said...

MikeAdamson said...
Very polite hecklers I must say although loud enough to get the speaker's attention or else why would he keep turning to address them? I'd describe the stopry as overreaction rather than lying.


Be serious, they aren't hecklers at all. The speaker tried to use them as tools to further his agenda and even then they were so respectful they didn't respond until he asked a second time and turned to them as if expecting a response.

phx said...

But is it a matter to be flippant about? Assuming you are a proponent of strict gun control and bans, do you really believe such deception helps or hurts your cause?

Liberals like to mock the charge of there being a liberal media bias yet when examples like this occur, it seems the response is a wink and nod from the left.


I'm not a proponent of strict gun control and bans. I'd like to see some changes but I favor the 2nd Amendment and the right of people own handguns, rifles and shotguns.

I have my own reasons for disliking the media - I think they will always follow the money, and if it ever came down to it the citizens of the USA could not count on the media the way they once could. Shrug.

Little injustices like this don't rile me from one side or the other. I'd have to watch the video to form a coherent opinion and that's not something I want to do.

Brennan said...

Why haven't conservative billionaires bought up media, to counter this stuff?

Sam Zell bought the Tribune. But he bought it for the losses. Yes, the losses. Zell's capital gains strategy has always revolved around paying no net taxes. The Tribune had run itself into the ground trying to remake itself. Zell took the losses to reduce his tax burden and then sold off the assets with value.

Dave said...

Althouse apparently accepts the following report of the exchange as fact - Heslin testified " ' … why anybody in this room needs to have one of these assault-style weapons or military weapons or high-capacity clips. [Pause, waiting for response.] Not one person can answer that question.'
Audience members: '[Unintelligible] Second Amendment shall not be infringed'......
Heslin waited for a response."

Note that twice in the above the writer claims that Heslin paused in his testimony, because he was "waiting for a response." That assumption has no basis in fact. The writer doesn't know what was in Heslin's mind. It's just empty speculation. Heslin might have paused since his kid's dead and it's a difficult subject for him to discuss. And polite people with opposing views should have the good sense to shut up in this sort of situation. But the paranoid gun nuts aren't polite. Just the sort Althouse encourages to participate here where ignorant incivility and mindless speculation trumps reason and civility.

Chip Ahoy said...

...Instead of a golf club, someone photoshopped a shotgun.

That was T.N.T.N.R.

The new The New Republic. I'm tempted, if only I were a fighter, if only my thinking occurred on a similar level, I'd be tempted to provide more, to drive the point that they're really not that astute political observers after all. Bring it. Obama kissing a baby : O kisses gun, O signs legislation : O signs a gun, Obama rides a bicycle : O rides a rifle, Obama meets with Putin : O meets with AR-15, Obama reads a book to children : O presents an AR-15 to children, Obama eats a hamburger : O eats a 30 cartridge magazine, and so on. On and on and on and on and on. A couple or three each day, to put another obsession on display.

DADvocate said...

Try, deliberate. This goes beyond shameful into insidious. The majority of media outlets are nothing more than propaganda arms for leftist views.

Conspiratorial. Left wing news outlets and journalists spew and spread the story without verifying its veracity. Their desire to impose their lefty dystopia on us a rob us of our rights over-rides even the slightest tint of honesty.

Yes, far beyond shame because it's happened so many times before. We need a lawsuit or prosecution for conspiracy to deny civil rights.

Colonel Angus said...

Little injustices like this don't rile me from one side or the other.

I guess where you see a little injustice I see something far larger. A major media outlet that edits audio or video to produce an outcome opposite from what really occured is indeed shameful, considering such deception influences millions of viewers.

Im certain if selective editing was done that portrayed say, blacks or Hispanics in a poor light, would you consider that a little injustice?

I'd have to watch the video to form a coherent opinion and that's not something I want to do.

Is it because doing so would cause you to think it was not a little injustice?

Chip Ahoy said...

Wrong again Dave.

The pause WAS waiting for a response. The listeners there DID wait patently suffering the rhetorical question for which they HAVE a perfectly good answer, but they UNnuttishly stood there and took it because the man is clearly suffering. Then he asked it again. so they sanely and quietly and respectfully answered.

Now quit lying. You're part of the problem under discussion.

Sofa King said...

Do you not think the editing of a 911 call to imply Zimmerman was motivated by race as shameful and despicable?

Of course not, it's all a big laugh to him. His primary moral principle is winning - lesser goals like fairness, truth, or even simple decency are subordinate to this, luxuries to be afforded when convenient, but never at the cost of winning.

Marshal said...

Dave said...
Note that twice in the above the writer claims that Heslin paused in his testimony, because he was "waiting for a response." That assumption has no basis in fact. The writer doesn't know what was in Heslin's mind. It's just empty speculation. Heslin might have paused since his kid's dead and it's a difficult subject for him to discuss


It's pretty clear you haven't watched the video. If he was pausing because of the subject matter he would not have turned around to the audience, and when he repeated himself there is a change in tone emphasizing the question.

Further, as pointed out the audience did maintain silence until he turned directly to them and asked a second time.

But the paranoid gun nuts aren't polite.

Nor are you, honesty being a prerequisite for politeness.

bagoh20 said...

The answer is: Yea, the guy who should have been protecting your child needed to have one, but he wasn't allowed, so now you want that to be national policy?

Jay said...

Dave said...

Note that twice in the above the writer claims that Heslin paused in his testimony, because he was "waiting for a response." That assumption has no basis in fact.


You mean other than the fact he asked a question and stopped talking as normal people do when they wait for a response, right?

My God, are you a fucking idiot.

Dave said...

"Second amendment" is NOT a good answer - We do not have absolute rights to weapons in this country.

And people watching hearings or trials are supposed to keep quiet.

Colonel Angus said...

But the paranoid gun nuts aren't polite. Just the sort Althouse encourages to participate here where ignorant incivility and mindless speculation trumps reason and civility.

I suggest you watch the unedited video since its obvious from your post you didn't. He asked a question and looked around as though waiting for a response.

Jay said...

Dave said...
"Second amendment" is NOT a good answer


How the fuck would you know?

You silly little Newton heckler truther, you!

Marshal said...

Dave said...
"Second amendment" is NOT a good answer - We do not have absolute rights to weapons in this country.

And people watching hearings or trials are supposed to keep quiet.


Note the "evolution" of his defense. Now he's arguing the answer wasn't good enough, not that there wasn't a question. This is an admission he knows his first accusation is bullshit.

Colonel Angus said...

And people watching hearings or trials are supposed to keep quiet.

Then he should not have asked 'can anyone in this room give me a good reason..."

Dave said...

"Jay said - You mean other than the fact he asked a question and stopped talking as normal people do when they wait for a response, right?"

The man's only child was killed a month ago... You can't and don't know what he's thinking.

Assuming you know what another person is thinking is a self-delusion.

Jay said...

Dave said...
We do not have absolute rights to weapons in this country.


If I put 5 different types of firearms out on a table for public display - say: An M4, AK-47, AR-15, SIG PE–57, and a Barrett M107A1 - I'm quite confident you couldn't pick out the AR-15 if the grand prize was $500,000

So I'm not really going to listen to your gun control silliness.

phx said...

I guess where you see a little injustice I see something far larger. A major media outlet that edits audio or video to produce an outcome opposite from what really occured is indeed shameful, considering such deception influences millions of viewers.

Im certain if selective editing was done that portrayed say, blacks or Hispanics in a poor light, would you consider that a little injustice?


It hasn't been demonstrated to me yet that your opinion of what happened is more correct than MikeAdamson's here, who said it was more like an overreaction in his opinion? Why do I have to choose between yours and his opinion?


Is it because [watching the video] doing so would cause you to think it was not a little injustice?

No, it's because I don't want to watch those poor parents. But even if you were right I'd still call it a little injustice.

And I don't beleive anybody here has ever heard me use words like "shameful" or "despicable" to characterize Republican or Fox News transressions. That's just generally not the way I talk or think.

Jay said...

Dave said...

The man's only child was killed a month ago... You can't and don't know what he's thinking.


Hey stupid shit:

Nobody claimed to know what he is "thinking"

You should learn the first rule of holes and just quit.

X said...

You can't and don't know what he's thinking.

true. we have to rely on the words coming out of his mouth. which were in the form of a question.

bagoh20 said...

"Assuming you know what another person is thinking is a self-delusion."

Right. So if someone asked you that question twice, and paused both times waiting, you would assume they might be looking for a Starbucks?

phx said...

Yea, the guy who should have been protecting your child needed to have one, but he wasn't allowed, so now you want that to be national policy?

It's the parent's fault.

Marshal said...

Dave said...
The man's only child was killed a month ago... You can't and don't know what he's thinking.


Nobody claims to know everything he's thinking. We're only claiming that when he turns and asks a question he's turning and asking a question.

How unserious can this farce get?

Brew Master said...

phx...

I have my own reasons for disliking the media - I think they will always follow the money, and if it ever came down to it the citizens of the USA could not count on the media the way they once could. Shrug.


We agree that we can not count on the media, but I do take exception to the reasoning you put forth.

May I ask which political party do you think represents money, monied interests, corporations, etc?

Does the media, who you claim chase money, present that party in a favorable light?

phx said...

May I ask which political party do you think represents money, monied interests, corporations, etc?

I'm pretty sure they both do.

Dave said...

Jay - apropos your comment about weapons and the LA Riots. I lived through it and rejoiced when troops finally arrived. But - Do you know why it took the National Guard so long to respond? It was because the rapid response system put in place by Governor Jerry Brown (his first time in office) which would have allowed prompt deployment was defunded by subsequent Republican Governors who naively thought that there was no need.

Brew Master said...

phx said...
May I ask which political party do you think represents money, monied interests, corporations, etc?

I'm pretty sure they both do.


And do you believe that both parties are treated equal in the press?

phx said...

And do you believe that both parties are treated equal in the press?

Which press? Fox or CNN? Wall St Journal or NYTimes?

bagoh20 said...

"It's the parent's fault."

More emotional civility bullshit. It's the fault of whoever thinks you protect children from crazy gunmen by preventing anyone from protecting them? Somebody decided those kids were less worth protecting than their bank deposits in a safe. Is that you? Did parents make that policy? Do you defend it? Or do you just emote and hope you don't get blamed when it leads to child neglecting policy.

Brew Master said...

phx said...
And do you believe that both parties are treated equal in the press?

Which press? Fox or CNN? Wall St Journal or NYTimes?


The Press.

All inclusive.

phx said...

It's the fault of whoever thinks you protect children from crazy gunmen by preventing anyone from protecting them?

And I thought it was the fault of the person who did it.

Dave said...

"Jay said - Hey stupid shit:

Nobody claimed to know what he is "thinking"

You should learn the first rule of holes and just quit."

Actually the author of the article wrote "pause for response" - an accurate transcription would read "pause" -

By the way - the first rule of "holes" is to not engage them in conversation - so I'll sign off and not address you in the future.

phx said...

Brew Master: You're a respectful interrogator, I don't mean to sound cagey or cute with you.

Keep in mind of the four examples I provided, I get none of them and haven't for 5-10 years at least.

I don't get the local paper. I see Public TV news and CBS, NBC, ABC a couple of times a week.

When I do see I don't see a huge bias in news reporting. Sometimes something slips out that does seem biased, but not a real lot. Not enough to make me real critical.

I always had respect for WSJ and NYT news reporting, thought they both were excellent. As I say that was some time ago and I can't imagine if WSN has changed in particular. You'd have to follow it for a while to make a determination I would think.

I have never seen Fox News or MSNBC.

No, media bias does not seem a real problem to me. I'm sure sometimes it's there, it's a human endeavor. But I think Republicans are probably playing a victim role here.

AllenS said...

You're right, Chip, it was The New Republic. I had to look up where I saw the article this morning. Here it is.

Too funny. Same Old Shit from The New Republic.

phx said...

Now magazines like New Republic, Slate, NYROB, The Nation, etc. are supposed to have point of view and they don't make any bones about it as far as I know. They aren't "deceiving" anyone that way AFAICT.

Brew Master said...

Sometimes something slips out that does seem biased, but not a real lot. Not enough to make me real critical.

No, media bias does not seem a real problem to me. I'm sure sometimes it's there, it's a human endeavor. But I think Republicans are probably playing a victim role here.


Just a few more question then.

Those times that you do see bias, do you see equality in the bias, does it favor both conservative and liberal views?

The fact that you do not perceive a bias, would it stand to reason then that the media that you consume conforms mostly to your views, not only of your own positions, but the positions of your opponents?

Ergo, you do not see bias because what is presented already conforms to your views. Your opponents see bias because what is presented doesn't conform to their views.

I put forth, again, that the majority of media outlets present their progressive views as the norm.

bagoh20 said...

"And I thought it was the fault of the person who did it."

It was the crazy killer's responsibility to protect the children? How did that work for them? How did that gun-free zone work for them?

bagoh20 said...

You see phx, the kids weren't just victims of a gunman. Someone decided that if one comes, we're gonna hide in the closet as our only defense, and we refuse to let anyone do anything more than that. So who's fault was it? Who's fault will the next one be?

phx said...

Ergo, you do not see bias because what is presented already conforms to your views. Your opponents see bias because what is presented doesn't conform to their views.

I see your point. I am a fairly critical viewer/thinker, though not the smartest tack and I'm capable of being taken in. But I have seen some bias on the 3 networks in favor of the "left" side. I don't like it when I see it but I find the self-serving bias of the networks to be even worse.

So I find network news unreliable or at the least frustrating and I don't watch it more than a couple of times a week - usually to pick up on a particular story.

I gather the bias you are talking about is even worse at MSNBC and FOX news.

I think public tv news programming is much more fair to both sides.

So I see a split, maybe favoring the left a bit. Throw in the Internet media and it probably now overall favors the right.

Anyway I'm not one to complain about Fox News or WSJ or Murdoch much. I don't see that bias as the real problem.

phx said...

You see phx, the kids weren't just victims of a gunman.

Ha ha ha! "You see phx" That's so avuncular! You must talk to your wife and kids that way.

furious_a said...

phx: It hasn't been demonstrated to me yet that your opinion of what happened is more correct than MikeAdamson's here...

Seeing as how you've stated repeatedly (and, to be fair, understandably) you don't want to watch the video, you've got no business stating that anything has or hasn't been demonstrated.

Colonel Angus said...

It hasn't been demonstrated to me yet that your opinion of what happened is more correct than MikeAdamson's here, who said it was more like an overreaction in his opinion? Why do I have to choose between yours and his opinion?

You don't but then if you haven't seen the video, why bother commenting?

No, it's because I don't want to watch those poor parents. But even if you were right I'd still call it a little injustice.

So then you have a low bar for tolerating deception. If there is an incident of selective editing to make a certain ethnic group look bad, let me know if you still feel the same way.

And I don't beleive anybody here has ever heard me use words like "shameful" or "despicable" to characterize Republican or Fox News transressions.

That's fine too. I just tend to expect at least honesty if bias isn't available. Evidently even that's too much to ask.

phx said...

I just tend to expect at least honesty if bias isn't available.

I really don't understand that. Maybe I'm being dense.

Colonel Angus said...

Anyway I'm not one to complain about Fox News or WSJ or Murdoch much. I don't see that bias as the real problem.

So just so I'm clear, when a media outlet edits a video to show something that really didn't occur or, for instance, manufactures 'evidence' to discredit a particular political candidate right before an election, you don't see that as a real problem?


chickelit said...

I blame the progresso stews and their seething cauldrons of hate for the 2nd Amendment.

phx said...

Don't forget how I came into this. I didn't come in to say that accusations that the media screwed this up or were dishonest were wrong. I didn't jump in to take a side on gun banners and gun advocates.

I came in to make a snarky comment on the judgmental language that gets used by a lot of people when we talk about these issues ("shameful" "utterly disgraceful"). I believe the way we talk to each other about our differences is probably more important than our actual differences and I've pretty much been that kind of commentator since I've been here.

Honestly, I can live with media transgressions on either side. I can live with the gun laws changing or staying the same. I have my preferences on some of these issues and they're probably not yours but I'm not that fiercely committed.

I think HOW people think about these issues is more important. And you can't really think about them, or debate them, with a clear head if you use all this emotive langauge.

Colonel Angus said...

I just tend to expect at least honesty if bias isn't available.

I really don't understand that. Maybe I'm being dense.


Let me help you out. If you want to show a one sided viewpoint in your newscast, be honest in your content. You can be biased without having to lie or manipulate your evidence to make it more effective.

phx said...

@bagoh20 I really don't know whether we should put armed guards in schools and daycare centers or not. Smarter people than me will figure that out.

But I see that you want me to feel somehow responsible for what happened because I may not agree with you on what should be done, and then you want to accuse ME of being emotional.

That's fine.

Colonel Angus said...

I think HOW people think about these issues is more important. And you can't really think about them, or debate them, with a clear head if you use all this emotive langauge.

Some people just think the deceptive editing to make a certain group of people look bad is shameful. Others think using a grieving father as a cog in the wheel of that deception is despicable.

But since you obviously are comfortable with a deceptive media, I can understand your point. At least you're honest about it so kudos.

phx said...

But since you obviously are comfortable with a deceptive media

No, I'm just good at being UNcomfortable.

phx said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Roger J. said...

a bit off topic but I saw the picture of Mr Obama skeet shooting--iirc one has two positions for a shotgun in skeep--on your hip pointed down range or on your shoulder if you are firing.--if Mr Obama handles a shotgun like that I would much rather be hunting with VP Cheney.

Marshal said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Marshal said...

phx said...
I believe the way we talk to each other about our differences is probably more important than our actual differences and I've pretty much been that kind of commentator since I've been here.


As long as you understand he means he applies one standard to the left and another to the right it's true he's consistently been that kind of commentator.

A couple of obvious comparisons:

-zero instances of phx accusing lefties of playing the victim for whining about Fox News.

-zero instances of holding lefties accountable for their ridiculous overreaches (his pet attack against the right).

furious_a said...

phx: Honestly, I can live with media transgressions on either side.

I can, too, like, for example, when a major network, like, say, CBS, runs a fabricated story based on forged documents about a sitting president on the eve of an election.

Or, take another example, on the eve of that same election, a major metropolitan daily, like, say, The LA Times, sits on a story about one of the other party's candidates hiding from the media in the public restroom of his baby-mama's hotel.

Or all those stories about "mostly peaceful" Occupy rallies and "potentially violent" Tea Party protests.

Or, during a recent Presidential debate, a moderator from a major cable news network interrupting and interjecting repeatedly to the benefit of the incumbent.

And so on and so forth.

It's easy to be easy-with-it when the transgressions pile up in favor of one's side.

EMD said...

Smarter people than me will figure that out.


You shouldn't be so trusting. Honestly.

You don't seem dumb, so don't act like you are.

EMD said...

a bit off topic but I saw the picture of Mr Obama skeet shooting--iirc one has two positions for a shotgun in skeep--on your hip pointed down range or on your shoulder if you are firing.--if Mr Obama handles a shotgun like that I would much rather be hunting with VP Cheney.

Roger, Photoshop can be useful! It was a golf picture altered to show him holding a shotgun.

AllenS said...

Roger, the picture was photoshopped. Barry was originally holding a golf club, which was replaced by a shotgun. I provided a link on another thread today.

phx said...

I never disavowed my political leanings, I don't hide any of that. Whether my judgments are biased, you'll have to judge. I can't expect anyone to see it the way I see it, I can't protest that you aren't judging me the way I judge myself. It is what it is.

We all have ourselves to answer to for our integrity or lack of it.

Now if you demonstrate (instead of speculate) where I'm falling down in the integrity department, that's another thing. I'll answer for that.

Leland said...

And people watching hearings or trials are supposed to keep quiet.

Ah yes, the classic: "... and shut-up". It's the new go to for people claiming to be liberals. When they can't make a rational argument, then the only thing left is the most unliberal notion of telling others they can't respond.

Roger J. said...

EMD and Allens--I am shocked shocked that someone would photoshop something that grotesque. thanks for the updates

furious_a said...

But since you ['phx'] obviously are comfortable with a deceptive media...

Because the deceptions accumulate overwhelmingly to the benefit of one 'side' vs. the other.

EMD said...

"(Obama) knows that we’re not going to play ‘gotcha’ with him, that we’re not going to go out of our way to make him look bad or stupid.”

Steve Kroft, CBS News/60 Minutes.

phx said...

Because the deceptions accumulate overwhelmingly to the benefit of one 'side' vs. the other.

I spoke to that at 11:56 (not very well true, but basically it's my POV).

You added some examples to show how the bias is very much towards one side. I heard of two of those examples before, and not the others.

My judgment from 11:56, for good or bad, hasn't changed.

furious_a said...

And people watching hearings or trials are supposed to keep quiet.

Fair enough, rules of order and all that.

But those called to testify are supposed to address their comments to the committee or court ONLY, not to the gallery.

So who broke decorum, again?

furious_a said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
furious_a said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Revenant said...

I should feel outraged over what NBC and other news outlets did here, I guess. But my actual reaction was more like "eh, typical".

I'm just too used to the news media lying, I guess.

damikesc said...

The writer doesn't know what was in Heslin's mind. It's just empty speculation. Heslin might have paused since his kid's dead and it's a difficult subject for him to discuss.

The event is on video, you know. Not hard to read a face, hate to break it to you.

If you don't want to do any investigation of your own, fine.

"Second amendment" is NOT a good answer - We do not have absolute rights to weapons in this country.

And people watching hearings or trials are supposed to keep quiet.


Do the hearings or trials specifically ask the audience questions repeatedly and wait for responses?

And, yes, the 2nd Amendment is a suitable answer. The reason "because I can" is reason enough for our rights.

Fuck you and your love affair with fascism.

Revenant said...

"Second amendment" is NOT a good answer - We do not have absolute rights to weapons in this country.

The first half of your sentence has nothing to do with the second half of your sentence.

No right -- not even the right to life -- is absolute, sure. But no right can be broken without sufficient reason. So we don't need to give a reason why we want to own an AR-15. You need to give a convincing reason why it is vitally important that we not be allowed to own one.

"My son was killed by one" isn't a valid reason, incidentally.

And people watching hearings or trials are supposed to keep quiet.

If you want people to keep quiet, don't ask them questions. :)

furious_a said...

phx: Which press? Fox or CNN/ABC/NBC/CBS/NPR/PBS/MSNBC/Bloomberg? Wall St Journal or NYTimes/Washington Post/Boston Globe/LA Times/Orlando Sentinel/Miami Herald/USA Today/Gannett/MN Star-Tribune/SF Chronicle/AP/STL P-D/SEA P-I/ATL J-C?

There, fixed your false equivalence for you.

JL said...

Given all the dumb things Republicans have said, who can blame the media for assuming the worst? Stop the crying and start saying only smart stuff.

(Was that meant as sarcasm? ) Dems say plenty of stupid things. Remember Guam tipping over? Just google all the stupid things Obama has said.

Because of media bias, Dem stupidity, cupity, mendacity, perversity, etc., is covered up or excused by the media. GOP stupidity is run in a loop over and over on the news, and comedy venues. That's a big problem for the GOP.

In addition, the narrative of the leftist media is that anything they disagree with is by definition stupid. Therefore everything the GOP says is stupid. And the pseudo-intellectuals and low information voters who want to be part of the "smart" crowd, eat it up. The GOP has to contend with that as well.

When I call the GOP the stupid party it is meant to reflect that the Dems are smarter at manipulating public opinion. It is not meant to imply that Dem policies, ideas and people are any smarter.

Alex said...

"supposed to keep quiet"

Yeah I'm sure that's exactly what our Founding Fathers did.

PETER V. BELLA said...

They, like the right, lie about everything.

Dante said...

Why haven't conservative billionaires bought up media, to counter this stuff?

That Hungarian bought ads trying to explain the issues with the path we were on, but it didn't work.

Consider this. You are very wealthy. You own a lot of the production in the US, and also overseas, or you get money from imports.

Taxation is forced spending. Of course you are going to want more of that. If the government forces it, it's in your interest. If the government imports illegals, it's in your interest.

Many people are under the impression the wealthy pay some huge portion of federal receipts. They do not. Social Security receipts were nearly on par with Income taxes in 2010. The press doesn't talk about it, because it would expose an uncomfortable truth, that the money was spent, and the wealthy benefited.

The top 400 most wealthy individuals in 2010 paid 17% of their realized income in taxes. That's it. Of course, that does not include the vastly more increase in unrealized income. Social security is a regressive tax that takes about 14.7% of anyone with an income, to a point.

If you are truly in the ownership class, you want commerce. You want your products to be cheaper. So the ownership class is going to be all for cheap labor, even if it means the cost of supporting those people goes up, or there are massive costs to society. Someone else who cares about that will have to clean up the mess.

Taxation is forced spending. I can't think of a reason those providing goods and services who are in the ownership class would want to change the way things are. Borrowing money from future generations, to spur commerce is in their interests. Producing "cheaper" goods is in their interest. Even importing goods from overseas, and taking a transaction cut is in their interests.

Never mind that it's not in your interest. Your kids will be stuck with the bill, and you will be taxed for the bill.

Also, does the ownership class care about Quantitative easing? I think not. It decreases the value of the dollar, not the value of property. The stock market is roaring. Property becomes more valuable. Quantitative easing does nothing to change the value of property.

Anyway, this is a long post in reply to your note. But it explains the pickle we are in.

No one represents the middle class, and smart people have all been sucked up thinking about "Fairness."