Skip to comments.Washington Post Lies About Lawmaker’s Biblical Reference, Then Refuses To Quote What He Said
Posted on 11/11/2017 12:27:47 PM PST by ForYourChildren
The Washington Post lied about a lawmaker's biblical reference, refused to quote what he actually said, then mocked Breitbart for shoddy journalism.
After the presidential election last November, New York Times executive editor Dean Baquet gave an interview to NPR in which he admitted that his journalists simply dont understand religion.
We dont get religion, Baquet said. We dont get the role of religion in peoples lives.
Baquet was correct: Acela corridor political reporters dont understand religion, especially Christianity. Though he was specifically speaking about New York Times reporters, Baquets comments clearly also apply to the Washington Post, which on Friday morning accused a Republican congressman from Texas of claiming that the Bible forbids the unemployed from having food to eat.
The headline from the Washington Post couldnt have been more clear: GOP Lawmaker: The Bible says the unemployed shall not eat. Shocking, right? Judging by the Washington Posts reporting, either this lawmaker is a real jerk, God is a real jerk for hating people without jobs, or maybe even theyre both jerks.
Heres what the newspaper wrote about Rep. Jodey Arrington (R-Tex.):
(Excerpt) Read more at thefederalist.com ...
"Washington Post Lies About Lawmakers Biblical Reference, Then Refuses To Quote A Single Word He Said"
yes, this article is from March, but some reason, it seems relevant for now.
The media don’t get religion, don’t get people of faith, or the role of faith in our lives.
The media in the New York/Washington axis don’t understand a lot of things , not just religion.
Its behavior is the reflection of its owner Jeff Bezos, he also owned Amazon...think about that.
Simon Denyer and three other men claim Bezos asked for oral sex in order to get a job at WAPO.......Would that not make a wunerfil HEADline
The media being able to slander a person because they are considered public figures has always bothered me. I support the idea of aggressive efforts to dig into every aspect of the personal lives of publishers, reporters and opinion writers and publish every bit of their own habits, indiscretions and vices that can be found.
I must say, you have an astonishingly good idea there.
This is easy to understand; it is only to be expected of a cynic. And that journalists are cynics is easily proven.
Considering that in the opening paragraph of Common Sense Thomas Paine puts paid to the conceit that society and government are synonyms, and in the second paragraph he makes clear that society and government are in a real sense essentially antonyms, no one should be surprised that journalists, being cynics about society, are also naive about government.
- Journalists all know that If it bleeds, it leads - that, IOW, journalism is negative.
- Journalists also claim that journalists are objective.
- But that is impossible unless you believe that negativity is objectivity.
- And if you believe that "negativity is objectivity, you are a cynic.
Cynicism about society, and concomitant naiveté about government, are the defining characteristics of socialism.
If I had control of Congress and the Whitehouse Id consider pushing through a 10% Federal Sales Tax on newspaper subscriptions and advertisements.
Here in Washington State everything is hit with a large sales tax...except newspapers.
I would add that, today, the mark of a good journalist is the ability to make up believable fake news. He knows if he mentions faith in a positive light, he has lost most of the libs, right there (likely including his boss).
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.