Oh trust me we are on their radar.
Funny how liberals always whine about how unfair “guilt by association” is, but they will gleefully use “Guilt by indirect 7 degrees of Kevin Bacon association” to hurt their political foes....
So this tool, Krepel, is a former MediaSmatters person...
Case closed. Ignore.
The Guilt Card gets played almost as much as the Race Card
” Surprised that FReerepublic wasn’t mentioned as a hot bed of racist gun lovin’, bible totin’, racist miscreants. “
We already have our own politically correct South haters doing that, there’s no need for HuffPo to lift a finger.
Well, everything will be good when they remove the Confederate flag.
They just dusted off that whole OKC bombing narrative, did a global replace and shipped it out the door.
Just as the Liberal Left portrayed Timothy McVeigh as a Right Wing terrorist to assist Bill Clinton in his re-election in 1996, they will attempt to use Dylann Roof in the same way for Hillary Clinton’s 2016 Campaign.
But when a savage towelhead commits murder, he was “acting as a lone wolf” and “wasn’t inspired by anything or anyone.”
I am as responsible for the Charleston shooting as Muhamad Ali is for the Boston Bombing.
In an appalling rush to judgment, the media slapped George Zimmerman with a scarlet R for the shooting death of Trayvon Martin, and now Krepel slaps me with one for defending Zimmerman in my book If I Had A Son. In one of the more egregious guilt-by-association gambits in recent memory, Krepel then links my defense of a transparently innocent man to the Charleston shooting. Let me ask again, “Does the HuffPo have no editors? No lawyers?”And why would they need lawyers? Their self-righteousness is so extreme that they cannot conceive of the idea of being successfully sued for promoting "politically correct” lies.
A year ago, the Florida courts denied Zimmerman the right to sue NBC for libel. The reason cited was that Zimmerman made himself a public figure by “voluntarily injecting his views into the public controversy surrounding race relations and public safety in Sanford.”That needs to be appealed to SCOTUS, if necessary. I would enthusiastically contribute to a legal defense fund with that in view. Provided that the suit was not for a paltry couple of million, against one network, but for $1 billion in RICO damages against not only NBC but the Associated Press, and its members individually - joint and several liability.Because it is the AP and its membership which, as a practical matter, constitute “the media” (the existence and dolorous impact of fictional media, and the existence of other wire services, notwithstanding). The guilt of NBC is open-and-shut; they broadcast an edited version of Zimmerman’s discussion with the police civilian contact in which one question, as to the appearance of the subject, and preceding answer to the question as to the cause for suspicion, were excised. What abuse could not be place in your mouth by that method?
But although the AP and its other members are not directly guilty of that self-same egregious libel, they constitute the milieu in which egregious libel flourishes. They are a mutual admiration society vouching for each other’s objectivity - and therefore, to belong to the AP is tantamount to claiming objectivity for yourself.
There is of course no objection to trying to be objective; true effort in that direction is virtuous. The problem is that it is arrogant - a vice - to claim a virtue. Thus, to claim the virtue of objectivity is to make it impossible, not only to actually be objective - which after all is something it is not given to mortal man to even know, let alone be - but even to make a good-faith effort to try to be objective. Why? Because to try to be objective, you must seriously scrutinize your own motives and interests for the possibility that “where you stand” might be affected by “where you sit.” Which effort is blocked by your a priori assumption that you don’t even have any motives or interests.Thus, the phenomenon we call “the media” is actually the AP functioning as a propaganda monopoly able to censor the reality - based on the finding of a jury, and on my own monitoring of the trial online - that Zimmerman was not guilty.The claim that Zimmerman was “a public figure” because
Zimmerman “injected his views” by working with the NAACP to launch a public protest over the failure of the Sanford Police Department to arrest the son of a white officer who had beaten a homeless black man.is in itself deeply flawed. If indeed Zimmerman actually had been well known for his having fought to vindicate the rights of a black man abused by the police, how could the “white Hispanic” meme have ever gained the slightest traction??? Zimmerman’s activism ran exactly counter to the narrative established by “the media” (concretely defined above). The Trayvon Martin case was not inherently political, until made so by people who pushed narratives that Zimmerman - Democrat that he was - actually would have tended to agree with.But even public figures actually can sue for libel if they meet the strict “actual malice” standard. NBC manifested utter contempt for truth by editing out an answer then a question from Zimmermans dialogue with police. The fact that people actually believe that Zimmerman attacked Martin - notwithstanding a jury’s contrary finding which was required by the evidence - is proof that the AP and its membership was - still is - complicit in the libel.