PDA

View Full Version : Lying to the public about gun owners



Louis of PA
09-01-2009, 03:57
I’ve contended for years that the most dangerous power today in the United States is our news media.
During the election cycle, controlled by their liberal ideology, they closed their eyes and prevented their readers and viewers from learning of the troubling background of this new president.

On matters of firearms, they routinely distort, and in the cases mentioned here, outright lie about facts. This is how people behave who have no principles, no moral compass to guide them.

The Washington Times is one of the few I know of that still employs people deserving of the term ‘journalist’.

Regards,
Louis of PA

In today’s Washington Times:

False reports about guns

Many media outlets have misfired about guns. Countless newspapers and television networks -- from CBS to MSNBC -- have misreported that conservative protesters are threatening President Obama with guns at public events. It hasn't happened.

In Portsmouth, N.H., a man carrying a gun, William Kostric, joined an Aug. 11 health care protest. This was blocks away and hours before Mr. Obama's town-hall meeting in that city. Mr. Kostric was given permission to be on church property where the protest occurred and was not at the place the president visited. What most of the coverage left out was that Mr. Kostric didn't carry his gun only for the protest; he legally carries a gun with him all the time for protection.

While the media regularly used terms such as "hotheads" to mischaracterize the situation, the coverage ignored that union members who opposed the protest had attacked Mr. Kostric and a friend, kicking, pushing and spitting on them. Despite violence against him by Mr. Obama's supporters, Mr. Kostric did not draw his gun or threaten anyone.

On the CBS Evening News, Katie Couric asked, "Are we really still debating health care when a man brings a handgun to a church where the president is speaking?" Deliberately or not, she got the facts wrong. As we know, Mr. Kostric did bring a gun to the church, but the president was not there and never was scheduled to speak there. Mr. Obama spoke at a separate event at a local high school at a different time. Not letting facts get in the way of her hysterical story line, Ms. Couric linked Mr. Kostric's gun to "fear and frankly ignorance drown[ing] out the serious debate that needs to take place about an issue that affects the lives of millions of people."

In another case in Arizona, a black man staged an event with a local radio host and carried a semiautomatic rifle a few blocks away from another Obama town-hall meeting. According to the radio station, the staged event was "partially motivated to do so because of the controversy surrounding William Kostric." This occurrence was not an example of an outraged gun-toting Obama protester, but a stunt to garner attention for a shock jock. Of course, this inconvenient truth was ignored by most news outlets.

MSNBC misrepresented the facts to try to back up a bogus claim about racism being behind opposition to Mr. Obama's agenda. On Donny Deutsch's Aug. 18 show about the Arizona town-hall meeting, the producers aired a clip of the anonymous black man carrying the so-called assault rifle -- but the network edited the tape so the man's race was obscured. Truth be damned, MSNBC anchor Contessa Brewer said, "There are questions whether this has a racial overtone. I mean, here you have a man of color in the presidency and white people showing up with guns strapped to their waists." Another commentator on the same show worried about the "anger about a black person being president." The supposed result: "You know we see these hate groups rising up."

MSNBC's irresponsible behavior is more than just bad journalism; it sows distrust between races. Ernest Hancock, the radio host who staged the event, was hoping to get some free publicity for himself and his show. Whatever one thinks of this PR stunt, it had nothing to do with race. MSNBC misrepresented a black man carrying a gun as a white man to invent a racial dynamic that didn't exist.

Media disinformation about guns is a sad sign of the drastic action liberals will take to undermine support for gun rights for law-abiding citizens. It's also an indication of liberals' extreme desperation as Mr. Obama's agenda unravels.

c&rdaze
09-01-2009, 05:04
I read the same article in the 'real' Times paper. Louis is right, as usual.

UUURah
09-01-2009, 06:24
Everything in the article Louis quoted is right on. The left in this country are trying their damnest to fire up anti-gun sentiments, by hook or by crook.

The worse is MESSNBC, with CNN right behind. I caught "Thrill up my leg" Matthews interviewing the gun packer and he gave him the third degree. Every time Matthews discusses guns he starts out with this statement. "I am not anti-gun, my brother is a NRA Member, but......". That is supposed to justify the diatribe that comes forth.

It's part of their "Alinski methods" they employ. Marginalize the opposition.

If/when they shove Obamma Care down our throats, what will come next?

2571
09-01-2009, 06:38
Did any of you do it when GW was pres?

I strongly suppport 2A rights but have real misgivings about open carry at presidential aperances.

RED
09-01-2009, 07:02
2571 you need to reread the reports. The guy was NOT at a presidential appearance. Yeah he was in the same town but not in the same place nor the same time as the President. Your LEO bias is showing. ie. The entire public consists of only three groups. Cops, bad guys, and bad guys that haven't been caught yet.

dave
09-01-2009, 07:40
2571 is a cop? Lives in Detroit and drives a vette? Hmmm!

UUURah
09-01-2009, 08:00
2571 is a liberal democrat who just happens to be a cop.

John Sukey
09-01-2009, 08:37
Lets see if i got this right. Obama visits Phoenix while at the same time I go shopping in Tucson while carrying concealed (licenced to do so) .
Now that makes me a RACIST BIGOT bacause I am carrying an EVUL NASTY GUN 70 miles away?

GOLL-LEE! I never knew that:eek:

Oh by the way which part of the messiah am I bigoted about? His white part or his black part? OR IS IT BECAUSE HE IS TO THE LEFT OF LENIN?

Vern Humphrey
09-01-2009, 10:25
I just suffered through a news bit on ABC last week on "Guns in bars and restaurants."

Now, the title alone will tell you the story was biased -- the movement is to allow people to carry when they take the family to a restaurant.

In the story they remarked in a shocked tone of voice that "only seven states forbid carrying in bars and restaurants!!"

Okay, newsmangler -- tell us all the bad things that happen in the 43 states that don't forbid carrying in restaurants. Show us how all the bad things you're predicting if the proposed measure passes are ALREADY happening in those 43 states.

What's that you say? You can't because nothing bad is happening? Gee. Whoda thunkit!

UUURah
09-01-2009, 10:39
Not sure about that situation with ABC but it's real simple to me.

A Bar that occasionally sells food will be a 51%'er. No carry.

But a Restaurant that sells beer and wine with the food, is a CCW eligible establishment, NOT a 51% booze seller. They make their profits selling food primarily.

It seems to me that there have been less and less mass shootings in food establishments lately.

Vern Humphrey
09-01-2009, 10:53
Not sure about that situation with ABC but it's real simple to me.

A Bar that occasionally sells food will be a 51%'er. No carry.

But a Restaurant that sells beer and wine with the food, is a CCW eligible establishment, NOT a 51% booze seller. They make their profits selling food primarily.
Ah, but that doesn't fit the party line.


It seems to me that there have been less and less mass shootings in food establishments lately.
And an honest news man would report that fact, instead of agonizing over what MIGHT happen if another state allowed carry in restaurants.

Dave Waits
09-01-2009, 03:14
Only good thing about CNN, MSNBC and the rest is that their viewership dwindles almost weekly. The majority of people now get their news off the net, free for the most part from the bias they know exists in the Media. The funny thing is that, with their unrelenting bias and false-reporting, they're marginalizing themselves. I read a Zogby poll once that put Mz. Vapid's(Couric) credibility-rating in the basement. If it appears to most of you that these 'Talking-Heads' haven't a clue, it's because they don't. Their job is to smile or act and read the Pap that's fed them. If they weren't on the big media outlets they couldn't qualify for a job at McDonald's.

Vern Humphrey
09-01-2009, 03:22
Oh, I agree. The Mainstream media has no credibility. For one thing, they've been caught flat lying too many times. For another, their bias is so blatant that even a child can detect it. Why anyone watches people like Katy the Potatie is beyond me -- unless they're flaming liberals and need to be reassured by an "authority figure."

Leonard
09-03-2009, 06:49
I was just thinking about how if the Lamestream Media actually started reporting the truth few would notice.
Fox and the innerwebs are where most folks get their information these days.

John Sukey
09-04-2009, 02:25
I am reminded about Dan Rather who gloatingly spread the story about Bush's military record. When it was proven to be an outright lie, his only comment was "well, it ought to be true"

Incidently Algore has Never released his military record, and we all know about "war Hero" kerry who got his silver star by taking all the credit for what others had done.

Vern Humphrey
09-04-2009, 06:25
I am reminded about Dan Rather who gloatingly spread the story about Bush's military record. When it was proven to be an outright lie, his only comment was "well, it ought to be true"

Incidently Algore has Never released his military record, and we all know about "war Hero" kerry who got his silver star by taking all the credit for what others had done.
When the Rathergate story broke, someone -- I think it was Bill O'Rielly -- said we shouldn't judge Rathe on only one incident. We should consider his whole career.

That makes him look even worse.;)

George Lingo
09-04-2009, 07:18
2571 is a political cop,have seen many over the years.They spend as little time as possible on the street.Strictly a desk man.

UUURah
09-04-2009, 09:33
the personal attacks. Before long someone will be crying "BAN HIM, BAN HIM BAN HIM..."!!!!!!

We all know 2571 is a liberal Obamma supporter. We can handle him.

Carry ON, Private.

Vern Humphrey
09-04-2009, 09:58
the personal attacks. Before long someone will be crying "BAN HIM, BAN HIM BAN HIM..."!!!!!!

We all know 2571 is a liberal Obamma supporter. We can handle him.

Carry ON, Private.
You are right of course. Although there is something to be said for the Australian approach.*



* During WWII, so the story goes, Rommel ordered an Italian unit to attack a British unit. The "British" turned out to be Australians, who sent the Italians back with the seats cut out of their pants and their buttocks painted blue. They also sent a polite note to Rommel, telling him it would not be necessary to send them any more Italians -- when they needed specimens, they would come and get them. ;)

John Sukey
09-04-2009, 10:32
When the Rathergate story broke, someone -- I think it was Bill O'Rielly -- said we shouldn't judge Rathe on only one incident. We should consider his whole career.

That makes him look even worse.;)

So by that standard, we shouldn't judge a bank robber or a murderer by just one crime, we should look at their entire record.
:eek:
If Rather had apologised and said he was duped, I could accept that, BUT he DID NOT apologize to the public OR the president.:evil6:

Vern Humphrey
09-04-2009, 10:38
So by that standard, we shouldn't judge a bank robber or a murderer by just one crime, we should look at their entire record.

Actually, that's not a bad point. If you look at the typical bank robber or murderer's record, you find a long list of crimes, usually including petty theft, assault, drug possession, and so on.

Which kinda describe's Rather's career, too.;)