New Board

For refugees from MyWay and Tek Board II, and for anyone else wishing to participate.

    The same thing they've been doing for decades, though it seemed a little less obvious before


    Posts : 3651
    Join date : 2016-08-26
    Age : 66
    Location : Home

    The same thing they've been doing for decades, though it seemed a little less obvious before

    Post  sinister_midget on Thu Nov 01, 2018 4:57 am

    The media only cared about blaming 'both sides' for violence when it was a Democrat's fault

    It’s funny how when a Democrat explicitly motivated by partisan politics shoots up a baseball field, everyone is supposed to take responsibility because “both sides” are to blame. But when a lunatic with no party affiliation, and who hates President Trump, allegedly sprays bullets in a synagogue, well, Republicans have a lot to answer for.

    Washington Post columnist Eugene Robinson wrote Monday in response to the synagogue massacre, “‘Both sides’ are not responsible for the horrific political terrorism we have seen this past week” because “only the right is to blame — starting with President Trump and his complicit enablers in the Republican Party.”

    Forty-eight-year-old Robert Bowers, the suspect charged with murdering 11 people and injuring several more at the Pittsburgh synagogue, was not registered with any political party, according to the Associated Press.

    He apparently spent his days on a social media platform called Gab airing out his resentments, which included remarks by Bowers that Trump is “surrounded by kikes,” is “a globalist, not a nationalist,” and that “[t]here is no #MAGA as long as there is a kike infestation.” He also said in one posting that he did not vote for Trump.

    “For the record, I did not vote for him, nor have I owned, worn or even touched a maga hat,” Bowers wrote on Gab.

    Absent all real evidence that Bowers was motivated by Trump or Republicans to kill nearly a dozen Jews, Robinson and others in the media have pointed to Bowers’ hatred for immigrants and its supposed link to Trump’s recent campaign rhetoric on the so-called “caravan” of Central American migrants heading to the U.S.

    “Bowers was fixated on the so-called caravan of Central American migrants, which Trump and the Republicans have cynically exploited to drive turnout in the midterm election,” wrote Robinson.

    Bowers was not so much “fixated” on the caravan as he was a critic of the Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society, a Jewish organization that aids refugees.

    Bowers was convinced that the caravan was a product of HIAS.

    "HIAS likes to bring invaders in that kill our people,” he said in a Gab post shortly before the killing spree. “I can’t sit by and watch my people get slaughtered. Screw your optics, I’m going in.”

    Only certain news media could listen to Trump ring the alarm over immigrants coming from Central America and find its true connection to a Pittsburgh synagogue shooting carried out by a crazed anti-Semite.

    “Don’t tell me that ‘both sides’ need to do better,” Robinson wrote. “Republicans who remain silent deserve to be swept out of office.”

    Contrast that to what some media said about James Hodgkinson, a Bernie Sanders supporter, who made sure it was Republicans practicing in a baseball field outside of Washington, D.C., before he went on his rampage, most notably shooting and critically wounding Rep. Steve Scalise, R-La.

    In the face of all evidence that Hodgkinson was a Democrat animated to go on a shooting rampage by his own political frustrations, New York Times political reporter Glenn Thrush looked to Trump. "Any debate about civility in politics begins with Trump," he wrote at the time on Twitter. "No one has degraded discourse more, while embracing the fringe."

    A bemused editorial in the Washington Post asked, "Who knows what mixture of madness and circumstance causes someone to pick up a gun and go on a rampage?"

    Who knows?! If only there had been some clue, like if Hodgkinson belonged to a Facebook group called, "It's Time to Destroy Trump & Co."

    Oh, he was literally a member of a group by that exact name.

    CBS Evening News anchor Scott Pelley ended his program the day after the shooting by decrying unspecified "leaders and political commentators who set an example" for having "led us into an abyss of violent rhetoric."

    See, when a partisan Democrat opens fire on a group of Republicans practicing baseball, everyone is called on to do better when they “set an example.” Meanwhile, Bowers didn’t like Trump, said he didn’t vote for Trump, and wasn’t a Republican, yet Trump and the GOP are expected to take full responsibility for his alleged actions.

    I’d include an example of what Eugene Robinson said at the time of the Hodgkinson shooting, but he completely ignored it in his column that week, much like he and most of the media have quickly sidelined the story about a GOP county office in Florida that was shot up Sunday night.

    At least he didn’t blame “both sides” for Hodgkinson.

    The media/left/communists only blame both sides when they can't escape their own connection. Even then they'll spend hours, days or weeks trying to wiggle out of any association before saying "both sides" need to take the blame for what one of their own misfits does.

    It's like they get amnesia as soon as one of their insane people unload. They forget about speeches made as late as the same morning or the previous afternoon calling for violence against Republicans. Speeches by the likes of Mrs. Bill Clinton, Princess Nancy, Eric (With)Holder, Loretta OughtaBeLynched, James Brown Waters, Joepedo Biteme, etc.

    Attorneys don't know as much about the law as lawyers do and Ben Shapiro is just an attorney. So, yeah.
    -- Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

    Posts : 3651
    Join date : 2016-08-26
    Age : 66
    Location : Home

    Re: The same thing they've been doing for decades, though it seemed a little less obvious before

    Post  sinister_midget on Thu Nov 01, 2018 9:56 am

    A Tale Of Two Acts Of Political Violence — And Proof Of Media Bias

    There have been two major acts of political violence over the past year and half. One by an ardent supporter of President Trump. The other by an ardent supporter of Bernie Sanders. How the press covered these two stories tells you all you need to know about media bias.

    In June 2017, James Hodgkinson fired more than 60 rifle shots at a group of Republican lawmakers and staffers who were practicing for an annual charity baseball game. Hodgkinson hit four people, including House Majority Whip Steve Scalise.

    While the other injuries weren't life threatening, Scalise nearly died. He spent more than a month in the hospital, underwent several surgeries, and required intensive rehabilitation.

    Political Violence On The Left

    Hodgkinson, it turns out, had been a volunteer for Bernie Sanders presidential campaign, and had a deep hatred for Republicans. In one social media post, he said "Terminate the Republican Party."

    Had Hodgkinson been a better shot, he would have assassinated several of them.

    There's a good reason for that, though. St Bernard had not too long before let Hitlery steal the presidential nomination from him. So he was due some sympathy rather than taking credit for one of his cult members trying to kill the opposition.

    Yet the coverage of the shooting barely mentioned Hodgkinson's political leanings or his connection to the firebrand Sanders.

    An analysis of news stories by Real Clear Politics' Kalev Leetaru showed that a mere 30% of the stories even mentioned Sanders' name in their coverage. And that share immediately started to drop as the days went on. (You can read his excellent analysis here.)

    None tried to pin blame for the shooting on Sanders' rhetoric, although a case could be made for one. Weeks before the shooting, Sanders declared that a Republican health reform plan would kill thousands of people. Hodgkinson reportedly shouted "This is for health care!" when firing his rifle.

    Nor did the mainstream press do any hand wringing about the violent rhetoric pouring forth from liberals against Trump and other Republicans — before and immediately after the shooting.

    Even while Scalise was in critical care, Sanders again accused Republicans of attempting mass murder, tweeting that the Senate health bill "could kill up to 27,000 in 2026 so they can give tax cuts to the wealthy." Sen. Elizabeth Warren called the bill "blood money."

    Indeed, the press' awareness of Scalise's shooting, and the motives behind it, are so dim that a prominent CNN host actually said with a straight face this week that "I don't see Democrats killing people" over politics.

    Political Violence On The Right

    Now contrast the Scalise shooting with the pipe bomber. Not one person was injured by the devices, several of which at least weren't capable of exploding. It's still not clear what Cesar Sayoc's motive was — whether he intended injury or simply wanted to scare people. (After being arrested, Sayoc said he didn't intend to hurt anyone.)

    I'm still not buying that the pipe bomber was "on the right." He followed only leftists on Twitter and Facebook. All of the junk in his windows looked like it had just been applied within minutes or hours before all of the pictures we've been shown, and the FBI covered the van in a tarp for awhile before letting those pictures get taken by removing the tarp. The clown was supposedly living in the van, yet the finish looked as though it just rolled off the dealer's lot. Plus the things were only sent to leftists. Which wouldn't be so odd if not for the fact that none of them worked. None of them could work. It's not clear if the guy was not smart enough to make one that could, or he put them together so they might look scary (and do a poor job of that) so it could be blamed on the right. Either way, a leftist could easily be responsible for doing something like that. And with the other combined evidence it suggests that was the precise purpose.

    And who would benefit from a fake attack? 

    • The fake attacked: DemocRATs.
    • The people who set up and encouraged a caravan of illegals that they decided need to be forgotten because they're being hurt by it.
    • The people who openly, and without any respect for commonsense or decency, tried multiple times to smear a judicial nominee because they thought that would promote them at the polls. But then they found out it does the opposite, so they need that one forgotten, too.
    • It benefits the same people who openly want to undo what has been accomplished the last 2 years, but found they can't run on that because it hurts them.

    That leaves them nothing to run on. Just hate, opposition to everything that people are liking about the current economic situation, and demand for power because they think it is theirs and theirs alone.

    So why not plot something that might get them sympathy since they can't go anywhere politically?

    Does any of that prove they had a hand in it? No. But something like that is not beneath them. And there are too many oddities about the story of the pipe bomb fakery to dismiss as mere coincidence. 

    Yet, even before anyone knew who was sending the devices — and before most of the mailings had turned up — the press immediately started to connect the bomber with Trump.

    As Leetaru at Real Clear Politics notes, "before any information was known about the bomber's identity, nearly 70% of the coverage of the bombs mentioned Trump. By Sunday, nearly 80% of the coverage associated the bomber with Trump."

    Even now, the press continues to claim that Trump's rhetoric is at fault not only for the mail bomber, but for the murder of 11 Jews in a Pittsburgh synagogue by a shooter who hated Trump.

    And when Trump complained about the disparity in how the mainstream press covered the two, they dismissed it out of hand …. without checking the record.

    Biased Coverage Of Political Violence

    So, to sum up:

    When a Sanders' supporter acts with clear intent to murder Republicans and nearly succeeds, the press ignores any connection to liberal politicians, or the left's violent rhetoric.

    When a Trump supporter, whose intentions are still not clear, targets Democrats with faulty pipe bombs that injure no one, the press spends weeks blaming Trump and Republicans for the tone of their rhetoric.

    There's still no evidence that he was a "Trump supporter." In fact, there is plenty of evidence that he didn't like Trump, partly because of his support for Israel. Never mind that his daughter and son-in-law are Jewish. That would be the daughter that is really close to him.

    It's not often that you have an opportunity to test media bias. But these two terrible acts of political violence provide one. And the mainstream press flunked the test. Badly.

    Attorneys don't know as much about the law as lawyers do and Ben Shapiro is just an attorney. So, yeah.
    -- Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

      Current date/time is Tue Feb 19, 2019 4:09 pm