Everything is out of whack with the story about the nameless black man toting a semi-automatic weapon around at an Arizona townhall meeting. Just everything.
One of the driving Lefty narratives about the nature of the townhall protests and the general popular opposition to Obama Care’s proposed government health care takeover is exemplified in this comment to the local Fox TV news affiliate:
“All the claims of Nazism and socialism are really racist attacks,” said David Sirota, one of many liberal columnists who define the growing conservative uprising as a “white backlash” — that of a dwindling white non urban America, aflame with grievances and awash in self-pity as the country hurtles into the 21st century and leaves it behind.
No matter that there’s nary an ounce of truth to the claims of Sirota — he makes a living as a liberal Democrat propagandist. I expect it from him. Not necessarily from a mainstream news network that until today carried at least a shred of credibility.
This story is almost too hard to believe, but the evidence is undeniable. As reported by Newsbusters (H/T Rossputin), MSNBC manipulated video footage first to imply that the man toting the AR-15 was white, not black, then to launch into a self-righteous on-air debate about racially motivated threats against the President. Talk about making news up to fit a preordained narrative. I’d like to think even Keith Olbermann would be ashamed to be so deceptive!
A justly outraged Ace of Spades has posted any and all available contact information for NBC studios and offices, so people can register their complaints and determine for themselves whether the cable propagandists “will just stick to falsifying the news in attempting to provoke a race war.” Along the same lines, Gene Kinsey makes the point we all should take away:
If you think you can believe anything on the NBC/MSNBC “news”, think again.
Taking the cake, Michelle Malkin says “I donâ€™t think there is a Cone of Shame big enough” for MSNBC. Wow … simply wow.
Speaking of shame, MSNBC’s wild outrage doesn’t justify the gun-toting as a sensible or productive tactic — unless his only goal was to garner media attention for himself. The Christian Science Monitor quotes my professional colleague Dave Kopel, who makes some very cogent points about the matter:
Yet the decision by the crisply dressed man in Phoenix to carry a rifle to an anti-Obama rally seemed to be intended as a provocative statement of Second Amendment rights, says Mr. Kopel.
“This is really a form of expressive speech, and I think the fact that the Secret Service … hasn’t gotten particularly upset shows good judgement on their part,” he says.
Still, the man didn’t necessarily do the Second Amendment cause any favors, Kopel says.
“While I think it’s really paranoid for some of the media to falsely characterize this as people trying to threaten the president, I think it shows bad judgement to carry [guns] near a presidential speech,” he says. Protesters are “trying to make a statement about Second Amendment rights, but they’re doing it in a way that probably sets back that cause.”
Just because you can doesn’t always mean you should.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.