Posted on 09/27/2005 4:44:40 AM PDT by Chi-townChief
CHICAGOLAND PING
So it was fake but dramatic?
I believe the term is "fake but accurate".
Lying is not a sin to a Democrat.
I know it was for Rathergate but this one needs a new term.
Putting them in the same categort seems reasonable, and ties together the intentional deceptions. "Fake but accurate" works.
It's not the facts that matter; those tend to just get in the way. No, my FRiend, it's the aura, the "vibes," the background mood which a tale creates that makes it important, whether it be true or not (and when a Dem is involved, chances are "not"). Because the end justifies the means, donchaknow.
factually wrong, but truthful? See Jeff Jarvis' blog. http://www.buzzmachine.com/index.php/2005/09/26/correcting-the-facts-and-missing-the-truth/#comments
"Dopey" almost got that part right.
In keeping with the facts of this "made for TV mini drama", it isn't Aaron Broussard and his B/S about "what members of his own staff had told him". It isn't even about Thomas Rodrigue and his dereliction of duty, as it came to his own mother.
What it is about is Tiny Tim Russert and his continual aiding and abetting in the WOATB. [war on all things Bush]
In that Mr.Russert is a pro.
I am almost convinced that the liberals have contracted with Tim Russert. He is just about the only "big gun" they have left, and he has come out of the woodwork to attack republicans everywhere.
A couple of weeks ago, Tim was moderating a Governor debate in Virginia, and became belligerant against the Republican candidate, violating the rules of the debate to score cheap laughs at Jerry Kilgore's expense, while being almost deferential to his democrat opponent.
This morning he is making the round of the NBC talk shows with his line that "republicans fear bush can't get back his numbers", that "bush is in trouble because he won't lower gas prices", that "when winter comes people will be mad because of heating oil prices", and generally being very negative about the President.
And while he "pretended" to confront Aaron this past weekend, he did almost nothing to question him, and accepted his explanation. And of course, allowing the story to go unchallenged the previous week WAS a defining moment in the coverage, cementing forever an impression. It doesn't matter how many people tell the truth now, people just KNOW that Bush responded too slowly.
Just like the story of widespread killing and rape, vs only 4 confirmed murders in New Orleans, 6 dead in the superdome, and 4 in the convention center (only one murdered).
What happens is there is a WILD exageration. Later, you spend so much time fighting the worst of the exageration that the rest of the story is assumed true, when in fact it too is an exageration.
So now a good part of the country will believe hundreds of people died of murder, looting, and starvation after the hurricane. But we will work hard, so a majority won't believe that -- but they will still believe FEMA stopped aid, that FEMA cut communications, that the federal government failed to respond. Because we don't have time to answer THOSE baseless charges, since we have to keep fighting the "Bush blew up the levey" and "Bush wanted black people to die" lies.
The democrats have blamed about 2 trillian NOT spent on things at home on the 250 billion spent on the war in Iraq. Every time something goes wrong, they re-spend the Iraq War money to say it could have been fixed if not for Bush's "illegal war".
And yet Tim Russert isn't out there pointing out that the congress DID vote for the war in Iraq, so the anti-war protester main argument, that the war was not authorised, is simply a lie. He's too busy speculating about how some future cost of services will sink the president.
I am almost convinced that the liberals have contracted with Tim Russert. He is just about the only "big gun" they have left, and he has come out of the woodwork to attack republicans everywhere.
A couple of weeks ago, Tim was moderating a Governor debate in Virginia, and became belligerant against the Republican candidate, violating the rules of the debate to score cheap laughs at Jerry Kilgore's expense, while being almost deferential to his democrat opponent.
This morning he is making the round of the NBC talk shows with his line that "republicans fear bush can't get back his numbers", that "bush is in trouble because he won't lower gas prices", that "when winter comes people will be mad because of heating oil prices", and generally being very negative about the President.
And while he "pretended" to confront Aaron this past weekend, he did almost nothing to question him, and accepted his explanation. And of course, allowing the story to go unchallenged the previous week WAS a defining moment in the coverage, cementing forever an impression. It doesn't matter how many people tell the truth now, people just KNOW that Bush responded too slowly.
Just like the story of widespread killing and rape, vs only 4 confirmed murders in New Orleans, 6 dead in the superdome, and 4 in the convention center (only one murdered).
What happens is there is a WILD exageration. Later, you spend so much time fighting the worst of the exageration that the rest of the story is assumed true, when in fact it too is an exageration.
So now a good part of the country will believe hundreds of people died of murder, looting, and starvation after the hurricane. But we will work hard, so a majority won't believe that -- but they will still believe FEMA stopped aid, that FEMA cut communications, that the federal government failed to respond. Because we don't have time to answer THOSE baseless charges, since we have to keep fighting the "Bush blew up the levey" and "Bush wanted black people to die" lies.
The democrats have blamed about 2 trillian NOT spent on things at home on the 250 billion spent on the war in Iraq. Every time something goes wrong, they re-spend the Iraq War money to say it could have been fixed if not for Bush's "illegal war".
And yet Tim Russert isn't out there pointing out that the congress DID vote for the war in Iraq, so the anti-war protester main argument, that the war was not authorised, is simply a lie. He's too busy speculating about how some future cost of services will sink the president.
Sorry about that duplicate.
Gotta be, I think Broussard did not think that that particular lady's death would be part of a larger story of the criminal charges filed against the owners of the nursing home. And, the discrepancies between Broussard's account and what came out later would not have been discussed without the bloggers. All of their basic information came from MSM sources. MSM did not, or would not, talk about it until the Bloggers rubbed their noses in the facts.
Muslims and Democrats don't consider lying a sin if you can attack your opponents by doing so.
Broussard: That's my story, and I'm sticking to it.
Seems Dan Rather used that tactic, as well.
The end always justifies the means with these cretins.
In the first part of Broussard's second Meet the Press show as the famous tearful account was replayed, Broussard almost started to weap again, caught himself, and proceeded with the story he had prepared full of righteous indignation as bogus as his tears.
C.K. Rairden wrote a piece HERE that outlines Broussard's lies. The additional fact today is that he was told when he came on Meet the Press he would be asked about his prior story so these were his best prepared remarks.
Lying is the most oft used weapon in the arsenal of weapons of the anti-freedom, anti-truth, anti-life criminal.
If you get the facts WRONG, the truth, justice and lessons claimed to have been discovered will be ERRONEOUS. My head is spinning from this "factually wrong, but truthful" take on things. Amazing!
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.