AA: Analysis Of NPR Sting Video By Glenn Beck Website Raises Ethics Questions

[JMS]

Turns out that James O'keefe's NPR video was mostly fantasy. He heavily edited the video release to falsely protray what the NPR executive conversation was about. I don't know why people, including myself are supprised in retrospect. James O'keefe did the same thing to acorn video he shot.

Splicing together questions with different answers or substituting laughter from an introduction onto the answer to an answer all geared to create a false impression.

Even Glenn Beck is now being critical of Okeefe.


http://www.allaccess.com/net-news/archive/story/88573/analysis-of-npr-sting-video-by-glenn-beck-website-


Analysis Of NPR Sting Video By Glenn Beck Website Raises Ethics Questions

GLENN BECK (http://www.allaccess.com/search?q=glenn+beck&m=n)'s THE BLAZE (http://www.allaccess.com/search?q=the+blaze&m=n) website jumped into the NPR (http://www.allaccess.com/search?q=npr&m=n) controversy last week, when it ran a story (http://www.theblaze.com/stories/does-raw-video-of-npr-expose-reveal-questionable-editing-tactics/) comparing Conservative video prankster JAMES O (http://www.allaccess.com/search?q=james+o&m=n)'KEEFE (http://www.allaccess.com/search?q=keefe&m=n)'s edited version of the "sting" on former NPR (http://www.allaccess.com/search?q=npr&m=n) fund (http://www.allaccess.com/search?q=fund&m=n)raising executive RON SCHILLER (http://www.allaccess.com/search?q=ron+schiller&m=n) with the unedited footage and called the editing "questionable."
The piece by SCOTT BAKER (http://www.allaccess.com/search?q=scott+baker&m=n) and video producer (http://www.allaccess.com/search?q=producer&m=n) PAM KEY (http://www.allaccess.com/search?q=pam+key&m=n) notes that the unedited video shows O'KEEFE (http://www.allaccess.com/search?q=keefe&m=n)'s phony potential donors downplaying their connection to the Muslim brotherhood -- that SCHILLER's reaction in the edited version to the group's "acceptance of Sharia," was actually a reaction to something else -- made complimentary as well as uncomplimentary comments about Republicans (and his own Republican background), and that other points in the edited video are given different context by the unedited video.
"Anyone looking at the edited version of the PROJECT VERITAS (http://www.allaccess.com/search?q=project+veritas&m=n) video would be concerned about the conduct and views expressed by the NPR (http://www.allaccess.com/search?q=npr&m=n) representatives," concluded BAKER. "But should we also be concerned about the deceptive nature of some of the video’s representations?.... Even if you are of the opinion, as I am, that undercover reporting is acceptable and ethical in very defined situations, it is another thing to approve of editing tactics that seem designed to intentionally lie or mislead about the material being presented."

Here is another article from News Max...


http://www.newsmax.com/InsideCover/npr-the-blaze-videos/2011/03/11/id/389216


Beck's 'Blaze' Critiques NPR Sting Videos

Glenn Beck’s new website, The Blaze has analyzed the conservative sting video that led to the resignation of National Public Radio’s CEO this week and is raising questions about the editing of the tape that suggested an NPR fundraising executive said that tea party patriots were racists, among other comments.

“The clip in the edited video implies (NPR fundraising executive Ron) Schiller is giving simply his own analysis of the Tea Party,” The Blaze reports. “He does do that in part, but the raw video reveals that he is largely recounting the views expressed to him by two top Republicans, one a former ambassador, who admitted to him that they voted for Obama.

“At the end, he signals his agreement. The larger context does not excuse his comments, or his judgment in sharing the account, but would a full context edit have been more fair?”

While the analysis of the full-length, unedited recording doesn’t exonerate the NPR officials, it does raise questions about whether the conservative undercover journalists were offering a fully honest account of the conversation in the edited video.

Specifically, The Blaze’s review of the tape suggests that the NPR executives were not as harsh as it originally seemed in their critique of conservatives.
“The impression of the original video, that the execs were only hostile toward Republicans and conservatives, is incorrect,” The Blaze reports.

Moreover, at one point, executive Betsy Liley actually defends the intellect of Fox News viewers. Their analysis also suggests, while the two executives should have been more curious about the nature of the Islamic charity they were dealing with, they were more discerning on the positions regarding Sharia, or Islamic, law.

“The raw video shows a section where Schiller is hesitant to criticize the education of conservatives and the other executive, Betsy Liley, is outspoken in her defense of the intellects of Fox News viewers,” the Blaze concludes.


Read more on Newsmax.com: Beck's 'Blaze' Critiques NPR Sting Videos
Important: Do You Support Pres. Obama's Re-Election? Vote Here Now!

[AsburySkinsFan]

Surprise surprise. I am surprised that Beck is calling the video "questionable", I'm not surprised that he hasn't refuted it all together. I also will not be surprised when many on the Right never pay any attention to anything other than the edited version of the video and ignore what was really said.

American Exceptionalism my arse, we're just like everyone else in the world.

[Henry]

Turns out that James O'keefe's NPR video was mostly fantasy. He heavily edited the video release to falsely protray what the NPR executive conversation was about. I don't know why people, including myself are supprised in retrospect. James O'keefe did the same thing to acorn video he shot.

Splicing together questions with different answers or substituting laughter from an introduction onto the answer to an answer all geared to create a false impression.

Even Glenn Beck is now being critical of Okeefe.


http://www.allaccess.com/net-news/archive/story/88573/analysis-of-npr-sting-video-by-glenn-beck-website-


Here is another article from News Max...


http://www.newsmax.com/InsideCover/npr-the-blaze-videos/2011/03/11/id/389216


Why anyone gives this O'Keefe clown the time of day at this point is beyond me.

[DRSmith]

People who want to will believe any lie told to them if it reinforces what they want to believe

This guy Okeefe has lied so much I am beginning to believe he does not know how to tell the truth.

[jnhay]

What credibility can you have if you get outraged after watching a video from a proven fraud? Just last week I heard a radio personality cite the acorn video like it wasn't fake.

[HBnotBlades]

Is this grounds for Ron Schiller to sue James O'Keefe for slander of defamation? O'Keefe heavily edited a footage in order to give a false impression of Schiller's conduct and views, resulting Schiller losing his job.

[DRSmith]

Is this grounds for Ron Schiller to sue James O'Keefe for slander of defamation? O'Keefe heavily edited a footage in order to give a false impression of Schiller's conduct and views, resulting Schiller losing his job.

I think those who run his stuff as fact should also be subject to any suits also

[Burgold]

I wonder if they did reversals of that nature if that takes us into the world of slander.

[Bang]

How is this legal?

~Bang

[Burgold]

It's probably not, but as you know from a lot of recent gotchas these things are rarely pursued. The bigger problem is that in a few weeks or months people will still remember the scandal, but forget that it was manufactured.

[Destino]

When Glenn Beck (and his affiliates) think you're stretching the truth too far... you've really accomplished something. :ols:

[twa]

It's probably not, but as you know from a lot of recent gotchas these things are rarely pursued. The bigger problem is that in a few weeks or months people will still remember the scandal, but forget that it was manufactured.

You mean like the accusations against Palin?

[Burgold]

You mean like the accusations against Palin?

Examples of people manipulating the tape to make Palin say something she didn't and reordering the conversation?

[twa]

Remember the supposed support for violence at the rallies?

[JimboDaMan]

Last time I checked, NPR was an electronic news organization with the ability to verify the veracity of the tape, and defend their employee if they so chose. Beck is grandstanding. Again. It's what he does.Oh, I suspect they were aware of the overall dishonest nature of the tape. Anyone who believes an O'Keefe production needs to seriously examine their gullibility factor.

But I see at least three reasons why resignations were necessary:

1) Even unedited, some of the things said were inappropriate. Nowhere near what the slanderers published, but still inappropriate for people in their position.

2) Arguing about what was and was not misleading is a lost cause for the accused.

3) At this sensitive point in time any protracted debate involving potential inappropriate conduct could be devestating to NPR.


So dishonest conservatives and their dishonestly edited material have cost more jobs, and your response is to excuse the liars. Nice.

[G.A.C.O.L.B.]

You mean like the accusations against Palin?

Your schtick is getting old.

[JimboDaMan]

Remember the supposed support for violence at the rallies?No, I don't recall manipulated recordings to give a false impression of that. I do recall reports that there were supposedly racist and/or potentially violent things yelled out at two Palin rallies. And I heard subsequent reports that nobody was able to document these accusations. But I never heard or saw doctored tapes supporting them.

[Burgold]

Your post uses logic, then concludes with non-logic. If NPR, which we agree has the technology to sniff all of this out, does not wish to do so. (Again, we are talking in hypotheticals because none of us truly know what is on this "edited" tape) Then conservatives have cost nothing. Here is a tip to live by, place responsibility where it belongs.

You mean the guys who created the distorted and manipulative tape, right? In several of the original articles, they mentioned that the tape was "heavily edited" NPR calculated that in this climate it would be more damaged by weathering the PR storm than by fighting the good fight. Sadly, this happens. Lots of innocents settle out of court for the same reason.

[JimboDaMan]

Your post uses logic, then concludes with non-logic. If NPR, which we agree has the technology to sniff all of this out, does not wish to do so. (Again, we are talking in hypotheticals because none of us truly know what is on this "edited" tape) Then conservatives have cost nothing. Here is a tip to live by, place responsibility where it belongs.Perhaps I should type more slowly, or use smaller words.

NPR most likely knows the true nature of the tapes. I attempted to explain why that doesn't matter once the false accusation is made. Here's a tip for you to use: try to keep up.

[Predicto]

Why anyone gives this O'Keefe clown the time of day at this point is beyond me.

Because he singlehandedly took down ACORN on false pretenses. That's a powerful resume point.

[Califan007]

Oh, I suspect they were aware of the overall dishonest nature of the tape. Anyone who believes an O'Keefe production needs to seriously examine their gullibility factor.

But I see at least three reasons why resignations were necessary:

1) Even unedited, some of the things said were inappropriate. Nowhere near what the slanderers published, but still inappropriate for people in their position.

2) Arguing about what was and was not misleading is a lost cause for the accused.

3) At this sensitive point in time any protracted debate involving potential inappropriate conduct could be devestating to NPR.


So dishonest conservatives and their dishonestly edited material have cost more jobs, and your response is to excuse the liars. Nice.
It's a bit like knowing your enemy is holding an empty gun, then handing him some bullets...and then getting pissed off at the manner in which he decides to shoot you lol...

[twa]

Your schtick is getting old.

Hey that's my wife's line

[Burgold]

Hey that's my wife's line

Is that a straight line or what!

[JimboDaMan]

False accusation? Using Glen Beck as your sole source? Really?My source is NPR. You know, the people you said had the ability to verify the tape's contents.

[Destino]

False accusation? Using Glen Beck as your sole source? Really?
Well we found one guy that still thinks O'Keefe is credible. lol

[mardi gras skin]

It says they compared it to the unedited version. That's the one I'd like to see.

[jpyaks3]

O'Keefe should be in jail, I don't know how anyone could reasonably believe any of the **** he puts out after that the stuff he has pulled and been caught lying about/editing to misrepresent people.

[Bang]

O'Keefe should be in jail, I don't know how anyone could reasonably believe any of the **** he puts out after that the stuff he has pulled and been caught lying about/editing to misrepresent people.

At the very least you'd think the people he's smeared could sue him into oblivion.

~Bang

[jpyaks3]

At the very least you'd think the people he's smeared could sue him into oblivion.

~Bang
I just don't understand how he has any credibility left after pulling stunts like this.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/01/26/AR2010012604145.html

James O'Keefe charged in alleged phone tampering of Senator Mary Landrieu's office


James O'Keefe was among four men who created a ruse to enter the lawmaker's downtown office, saying they needed to repair her telephones, according to court records unsealed Tuesday. O'Keefe used his cellphone to take pictures of two men, Joseph Basel and Robert Flanagan, who are accused in an FBI agent's sworn affidavit of impersonating telephone company workers. Stanley Dai is accused of aiding the Jan. 25 plot.

All four were taken to a suburban New Orleans jail and charged with entering federal property under false pretenses with the intent of committing a felony. If convicted, each man faces up to 10 years in prison and a fine of $250,000.

,,,,

"From the day that O'Keefe's undercover 'sting' videos came out, ACORN leadership pledged accountability for its own staff while pointing out that the videos had been shot illegally and edited deceptively in order to undermine the work of an organization that has empowered working families for four decades," she said. "Unfortunately, during the rush to judge ACORN, both the media and Congress failed to question the methods, intent and accuracy of Mr. O'Keefe's videos."

[Yusuf06]

You mean like the accusations against Palin?

Maybe I missed it. Do you mean this? (http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/01/poll_watcher_to_new_black_panther_party_videograph er_dont_fk_up_the_story_video.php?ref=fpb)

[twa]

Maybe I missed it. Do you mean this? (http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/01/poll_watcher_to_new_black_panther_party_videograph er_dont_fk_up_the_story_video.php?ref=fpb)

A TPM edited article?....yeah that seems comparable to a O'Keefe. clip..:ols:

[Califan007]

Maybe I missed it. Do you mean this? (http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/01/poll_watcher_to_new_black_panther_party_videograph er_dont_fk_up_the_story_video.php?ref=fpb)

??...Is that supposed to have something to do with Sarah Palin? lol *scratches head*

[JimboDaMan]

And one that thinks Beck is credible. Well, at least when it suits him.Tim, I'm embarrassed for you. It's usually wise to look for information first rather than posting what you think to be true and then asking others to spoon-feed you.

O'Keefe has published what he says are the unedited tapes. Nobody needs to take Glenn Beck's word for things.

[Yusuf06]

A TPM edited article?....yeah that seems comparable to a O'Keefe. clip..:ols:

Whether one agrees with the article or not is immaterial. The video itself tells the story. Surely even you aren't dumb enough to miss that....are you?

So do you have any comment about the fact that the video itself punctures yet another right-wing lie?

---------- Post added March-14th-2011 at 02:55 PM ----------


??...Is that supposed to have something to do with Sarah Palin? lol *scratches head*
Obviously not. My point was that if twa wants to go off script to avoid the point of the O.P., then we might as well truly widen the discussion to show that these aren't isolated incidents, but rather a pattern of behavior on the part of the GOP.

[twa]

Video shows what was alleged does it not?(the TPM )

[Califan007]

Obviously not. My point was that if twa wants to go off script to avoid the point of the O.P., then we might as well truly widen the discussion to show that these aren't isolated incidents, but rather a pattern of behavior on the part of the GOP.

Jeebus, you do NOT want to do that lol :ols:...well, unless you want to derail this thread completely. It will be nothing but a back-and-forth of examples of libs and cons using dubious methods to exaggerate the opposition's stances and "real" intent. Most political threads end up being little more than a game of "gotcha" between dems and repubs as it is. Don't encourage it lol :ols:...

[Thiebear]

If its spliced that would be a shame on me being its the second time... I never blamed NPR, I did write this guy off as the worst fundraiser since Chinagate.

[Burgold]

...of libs and cons. Don't encourage it lol :ols:...

For some reason, the abreviation for conservative you chose for this thread seems incredibly fitting :)

[twa]

Obviously not. My point was that if twa wants to go off script to avoid the point of the O.P., then we might as well truly widen the discussion to show that these aren't isolated incidents, but rather a pattern of behavior on the part of the GOP.

I thought I was agreeing with the point and Burgold that things are not always as presented??
Though certainly not just limited to the GOP.

[Burgold]

I thought I was agreeing with the point and Burgold that things are not always as presented??
Though certainly not just limited to the GOP.

One of the things I learned when starting to do radio work is how easy it is to doctor tape. If you wanted to you could make anyone say almost anything and the casual listener would be clueless 90% of the time. It really is pretty scary. I think it speaks well to the media in general (including FOX) that something as blatant and evil as this so rarely happens. There is a difference between even overt and conscious bias and what this guy seems to do. Even shock jocks like Beck understand and appreciate that. Glad to hear him repudiate the guy. I hope and wish he gets blackballed by the media entirely. I'm not sure why he wouldn't be. His tactics are such a black eye on anyone who uses his material.

[Larry]

O'Keefe should be in jail, I don't know how anyone could reasonably believe any of the **** he puts out after that the stuff he has pulled and been caught lying about/editing to misrepresent people.

Hey, people still pay money to see Michael Moore "documentaries".

[twa]

Hey, people still pay money to see Michael Moore "documentaries".

He's a artist...if he wasn't a liberal he would be called a con artist.:pfft:

[Califan007]

For some reason, the abreviation for conservative you chose for this thread seems incredibly fitting :)
You like that? lol :D...


Hey, people still pay money to see Michael Moore "documentaries".
Ouch! lol :rotflmao:


He's a artist...if he wasn't a liberal he would be called a con artist.:pfft:
(rimshot) He's here all week, folks... :applause:

[Yusuf06]

Video shows what was alleged does it not?(the TPM )
Uhh, :no: The exchange ""We're on the same team" and "You're ***ing up the story. Don't eff up the story," would seem to make one wonder. Especially when the Bush justice dept. never found anyone to file a complaint of intimidation about this. And why the editing? After all, the section that was edited out was a wopping two minutes long.

I mean did it ever occur to you who the "team" was? Nah, as long as it's yours you don't care. And as long as the ends are yours, the means don't matter. Gotcha. ;)

Conclusion: GOP uses a couple of clowns that showed up at the polls to try to drum up support for a joke of an organization to claim that Obama "stole" the election, again using "creative" editing in the process....yet again.

***Edit***
I thought I was agreeing with the point and Burgold that things are not always as presented??
Though certainly not just limited to the GOP.
Maybe I misinterpreted your response. It sure seemed to me that you were doing the usual "but they did it too" routine. If I was wrong, it sure as heck wouldn't be the first time and I'll gladly offer you a "my bad". ***/Edit***

[twa]

Uhh, :no: The exchange ""We're on the same team" and "You're ***ing up the story. Don't eff up the story," would seem to make one wonder.

The mere presence of someone with a club (outside of a LEO) at the polls is against the law,whether there is a conspiracy to show that occurring does not change that unless they spliced him in from a different location.

[Bang]

I just don't understand how he has any credibility left after pulling stunts like this.



The choir he preaches too desperately wants the things he brings them to be true, and typically are predisposed to believe they are true, and he has simply proven what they've known all along.

The fact he's a liar doesn't really seem to get in the way of the overwhelming desire for his lies to be truth.

There is no defending this clown. But people do. And so long as he gives them what they think they want, then they don't really care how he gets it, even if he makes it up out of thin air.

~Bang

[twa]

http://neveryetmelted.com/wp-images/MichaelMooreTShirt.jpg

[Yusuf06]

The mere presence of someone with a club (outside of a LEO) at the polls is against the law,whether there is a conspiracy to show that occurring does not change that unless they spliced him in from a different location.
I agree with you that the clowns outside the polls had no business being there and if the Govt. Had been able to find even one complainant they'd probably be deservedly sitting in jail now. However that's beside the point. The real issue is the attempt by some to show this as the norm rather than an isolated incident. Think of it this way, using the logic of these folks I could conclude that most American Whites are skinheads or klansmen based on having seen a news story about them.

Again not exactly the same thing but it absolutely does fit the recent M.O of the GOP. So the tactics don't have to all be the same to figure out that someone is playing dirty pool. Or at the very least one side is doing a much better job of it than the other.

[IHOPSkins]

TWA's Hilarious T-Shirt PicVery Cool

Its a Good point also....its not about "Under Regulation"....its about BAD regulation

[Predicto]

The mere presence of someone with a club (outside of a LEO) at the polls is against the law,.

You are right. That is why they told that one guy to leave the polling place, and he left.

Whether he can be charged criminally is different. There is no law against being scary looking and black, and there is no evidence that ANYONE was actually intimidated - not one person - and these cases are almost impossible to win even when they are much more clean cut than this.

I already wasted enough time explaining the damn thing to you guys, but no one seems to care. Gotta keep the conservative outrage stoked (for over two years now) over absolutely nothing.

[twa]

I ain't the one that dredged it up,but since ya mentioned it again :silly:....would the police and Justice be as accommodating to a white guy in the same circumstances?

Gotta keep explaining it away for some reason

[Predicto]

I ain't the one that dredged it up,but since ya mentioned it again :silly:....would the police and Justice be as accommodating to a white guy in the same circumstances?

Gotta keep explaining it away for some reason

Yes, and they have been accomodating. Pretty much no one ever gets prosecuted criminally for anything like this. Not even close, because it is almost impossible to prove beyond a reasonable doubt - especially when there are no one even pretending to claim that they were actually intimidated. If you were going to prosecute this guy, it would be for being scary looking and black, because he didn't do anything else.

You conservative guys automatically assume racial and political bias on the part of the DoJ, and there is no way to refute that assumption to your satisfaction, especially when a partisan hack clown like J. Christian Adams decides he is going to get his 5 minutes of fame by fanning the flames. But it's still total crap.

Over 2 years later we are still hearing about Black Panthers and stolen elections and so on due to this one idiot standing in front of a polling place - who left when law enforcement told him to leave.

[IHOPSkins]

......You conservative guys automatically assume racial and political bias on the part of the DoJ,.......Us Conservatives........And our allies in the NAACP

NAACP says Eric Holder’s DOJ goes too far with race policy

“‘The NAACP does not support individuals failing a test and then having the opportunity to be gainfully employed,’ agreed Dayton NAACP President Derrick Foward.”

http://pajamasmedia.com/tatler/2011/03/13/naacp-says-eric-holders-doj-goes-too-far-with-race-policy/

[twa]

Ya keep leaving out with a club for some reason.....irrelevant??

or inconvenient?

[JMS]

Examples of people manipulating the tape to make Palin say something she didn't and reordering the conversation?

My favorite revolution out of this is shellers own republican roots which he brought up several times in the interview none made it into the final edit.

[Predicto]

Ya keep leaving out with a club for some reason.....irrelevant??

or inconvenient?

Irrelevant. He says he went there because he heard a rumor that the Aryan Nations was going to show up. He left when asked. No one claims to have been intimidated. The white people standing there said that there was "no problem" - and they did it on tape at the time of the incident. A criminal case is completely unprovable. They got an injunction keeping away from the polls, but there is no way they were going to get a criminal conviction.

If you brought criminal charges against this guy, it would be a dead-end show trial, nothing more. Partisan hacks who read pyjamas media may not understand this, but criminal attorneys do.

Ask yourself this: why have there been, as far as I know, less than 5 convictions for federal criminal voter intimidation in the entire country in the 45 years that the law has been in existence?

[twa]

Irrelevant. He says he went there because he heard a rumor that the Aryan Nations was going to show up. He left when asked.

And the reaction would be the same if the Aryan nation had showed up with a club? :ols:

[Thiebear]

The racial tones of the scary black man you put in it are outstanding as step 1 to scare white people from replying as they then are racist by default also. Then to follow up with a "but a racist white guy with a bald head might have shown up also"
wow!

If you show up to the polls in a military outfit with a club and harrass people, that is a bad thing. The show is what HE put on.
The repercussions of HIS actions were stopped due to them being inconvenient for some.

[JimboDaMan]

And the reaction would be the same if the Aryan nation had showed up with a club? :ols:We would call him an asshat for showing up. Probably gripe about what jerks the Aryan Nation is. And if he left when asked, without intimidating anybody, that would be the end of it. Because we'd look stupid pursuing it further. :D

[Zguy28]

The choir he preaches too desperately wants the things he brings them to be true, and typically are predisposed to believe they are true, and he has simply proven what they've known all along.

The fact he's a liar doesn't really seem to get in the way of the overwhelming desire for his lies to be truth.

There is no defending this clown. But people do. And so long as he gives them what they think they want, then they don't really care how he gets it, even if he makes it up out of thin air.

~BangI haven't seen any of the video's, edited or not, but if he is editing it like is being claimed, he should be put in the stocks to have rotten vegetables thrown at him or some other public humiliation.
But then again, is anyone surprised? This is nothing new. Read newspapers from the election of 1824. We haven't changed or become enlightened. We're still as filthy as ever.

[twa]

We would call him an asshat for showing up. Probably gripe about what jerks the Aryan Nation is. And if he left when asked, without intimidating anybody, that would be the end of it. Because we'd look stupid pursuing it further. :D

Do you believe that?

Strange when there is still strong support for the Voting Rights Act almost 50 yrs later

[DRSmith]

And the reaction would be the same if the Aryan nation had showed up with a club? :ols:

Point him in the direction of the tea party gathering? :D

[JimboDaMan]

Do you believe that?

Strange when there is still strong support for the Voting Rights Act almost 50 yrs laterNot at all strange. Not even you believe that.

:Listen, I have an acquantance who has twice attempted voter intimidation on behalf of the Republican Party. Once he set himself up to photograph everybody entering the building at a primary vote, the purpose to publish pictures of anybody he deemed a "known Democrat" (Virginia doesn't restrict primary voting except through a signed pledge). The second time he set up a booth falsely "informing" voters that participating in the primary would register them as Republicans. (No club, but then the Philly guy didn't even approach voters far less intimidate them). The general reaction to this was everybody shook their head and said, "Waht a knucklehead".

[Veretax]

Not at all strange. Not even you believe that.

:Listen, I have an acquantance who has twice attempted voter intimidation on behalf of the Republican Party. Once he set himself up to photograph everybody entering the building at a primary vote, the purpose to publish pictures of anybody he deemed a "known Democrat" (Virginia doesn't restrict primary voting except through a signed pledge). The second time he set up a booth falsely "informing" voters that participating in the primary would register them as Republicans. (No club, but then the Philly guy didn't even approach voters far less intimidate them). The general reaction to this was everybody shook their head and said, "Waht a knucklehead".

And as recently as a few years ago people were buying votes in one or our Southern counties in what I think is Lincoln County, that was Democrats. So yes there is some corruption and it needs to be found and prosecuted where it is in fact happening. But to say ony one side does it is to greatly underestimate the diverse backgrounds and size of our country.

[DRSmith]

At the end of the day O'Keefe is not better than the people he goes after, lying from a biblical stand point is just as bad as the things he says others are involved in.

[JimboDaMan]

And as recently as a few years ago people were buying votes in one or our Southern counties in what I think is Lincoln County, that was Democrats. So yes there is some corruption and it needs to be found and prosecuted where it is in fact happening. But to say ony one side does it is to greatly underestimate the diverse backgrounds and size of our country.Well we're straying far from the op, and even from the latest diversion because vote buying is fairly cut and dried while "voter intimidation" can be less defined. But I didn't hear anybody say only one side is bad and only one side is good. I do agree that, since the dawn of the concept of voting, a ballot could be bought for the price of a meal or a drink and everybody has participated in it. But that's not what this is about.

[G.A.C.O.L.B.]

I haven't seen any of the video's, edited or not, but if he is editing it like is being claimed, he should be put in the stocks to have rotten vegetables thrown at him or some other public humiliation.
But then again, is anyone surprised? This is nothing new. Read newspapers from the election of 1824. We haven't changed or become enlightened. We're still as filthy as ever.

Actual campaign language from the 1800 election between Jefferson and Adams:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y_zTN4BXvYI

[Veretax]

I don't see an inherent difference between being intimidated into voting or not, and being paid to vote or not. The law may make a difference, but I don't I find both practices reprehensible by anyone who is gaming the system that way.

[Henry]

Actual campaign language from the 1800 election between Jefferson and Adams:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y_zTN4BXvYI

That's awesome. :)

[Thiebear]

We would call him an asshat for showing up. Probably gripe about what jerks the Aryan Nation is. And if he left when asked, without intimidating anybody, that would be the end of it. Because we'd look stupid pursuing it further. :D

I would call BS on this:
Aryan Nation shows up in outfit with a club threatening black people on video and we believe Justice Dept: / Holder would have had it dropped.
based on what exactly?

The Obama admin won a default judgement in federal court in April of 2009 when they didnt show.
But moved to dismiss the charges in May saying a "criminal complaint" which resulted in injunction was won instead.
Though the injuction is to prevent him from carrying a weapon to a polling place till 2012? (why not forever)?
And then the Department of Justice would not comply with the injuction from the Civil Rights Commision on the details of the case.
(Sounds like a Republican trick).

The same Eric Holder that said comparing Philly to what his people went through is demeaning. (the Attorney General).
(the straw man arguement: Though the 1500-s though 1960's were tough we don't excuse the recent).


The Real Black Panther party said the party the defendant belonged to was a bastardized version that didn't promote minorities, but hated white people.

[Predicto]

I would call BS on this:
Aryan Nation shows up in outfit with a club threatening black people on video and we believe Justice Dept: / Holder would have had it dropped.
based on what exactly?



The guy in Philly didn't threaten anyone. He just stood there, when they told him to leave, he left. Look at the tape - little old white ladies are walking past him to vote.

Don't make up facts in order to make a point. If an Aryan nations guy did the same thing he actually did, there would be no criminal prosecution either.

[Thiebear]

The guy in Philly didn't threaten anyone. He just stood there, when they told him to leave, he left. Look at the tape - little old white ladies are walking past him to vote.
Don't make up facts in order to make a point. If an Aryan nations guy did the same thing he actually did, there would be no criminal prosecution either.

Please point out what i made up again please with a link to the 'real'. I normally try not to make stuff up as i post.

You do realize as you tell me not to make stuff up your are regurgitating the Aryan Nation guy that doesn't exist and then giving your opinion on what the Justice department "Might" do if he actually existed?

So i have to stay on fact ( i use dates and real quotes from real people) , but you can say basically whatever you wish? ;)
though i was editing and retyping while you posted.

[Dan T.]

Please point out what i made up again please with a link to the 'real'. I normally try not to make stuff up as i post.

You do realize as you tell me not to make stuff up your are regurgitating the Aryan Nation guy that doesn't exist and then giving your opinion on what the Justice department "Might" do if he actually existed?

So i have to stay on fact ( i use dates and real quotes from real people) , but you can say basically whatever you wish? ;)
though i was editing and retyping while you posted.

In drawing your hypothetical parallel you have the Aryan guy "showing up with a club threatening black people on video." Predicto was pointing out that's a false parallel because the black guy in Philly never threatened anybody - he just stood there.

[Thiebear]

In drawing your hypothetical parallel you have the Aryan guy "showing up with a club threatening black people on video." Predicto was pointing out that's a false parallel because the black guy in Philly never threatened anybody - he just stood there.

I'll have to go over the few video's i saw: Cant see youtube at work.
I swore he was in Military Gear, he was not going in or out of the facility.
He was not voting, He was (making comments) and (brandishing a club).
He was at the doors "facing" the people coming in.

That seems to me to be the definition of voter intimidation.

How many people saw this being portrayed in front of them as he moves out of the way of some but not all and just left. Do we have a video of the entire incident or just a caption? (is this out of the realm of common sense)?

Technically I didn't draw up the comparison, i responded to what i thought was an incorrect opinion of an opinion so i gave my opinion :)
In which your opinion is that the original opinion was trash to begin with.

[JMS]

I would call BS on this:
Aryan Nation shows up in outfit with a club threatening black people on video and we believe Justice Dept: / Holder would have had it dropped.
based on what exactly?


I would like to call BS on you.. ( respectfully).... Did the panthers say anything to the "intimidated" white voter? Nope. They were standing in front of the voter local, and their "Camouflage garb created an environment of intimidation"?
Now as absurd as that sounds it really gets worse... the Black Panthers were standing in front of a majority-black precinct that had voted overwhelmingly for Democrats in previous elections -- not a prime spot for intimidating white voters.

Oh and the "weapon" you keep referring too... Why not call it what it was. One of the panthers was carrying A STICK.... he was flipping a night stick while in camouflage, while black... Let's prosecute!!!!..

This is really a dangerous case for conservatives. Not just that it's another example of trying to make a mountain out of a mole hill for short term political capital and long term liabilities. But because it's distracting from real issues which conservatives might have otherwise engaged Eric Holder on which are real issues, rather than stuff made up for cheap political points to their dogmatic disciples.

---------- Post added March-15th-2011 at 01:22 PM ----------


In drawing your hypothetical parallel you have the Aryan guy "showing up with a club threatening black people on video." Predicto was pointing out that's a false parallel because the black guy in Philly never threatened anybody - he just stood there.

Not only that, but in in Thiebear's metaphore it was the Aryan's invadeing a black club to threaten black folks..

In the real case under question the pathers were standing in front of a voting booth which was overwhelmingly black and strongly democratic not threatening anybody,

[JimboDaMan]

I'll have to go over the few video's i saw: Cant see youtube at work.
I swore he was in Military Gear, he was not going in or out of the facility.
He was not voting, He was (making comments) and (brandishing a club).
He was at the doors "facing" the people coming in.

That seems to me to be the definition of voter intimidation.

How many people saw this being portrayed in front of them as he moves out of the way of some but not all and just left. Do we have a video of the entire incident or just a caption? (is this out of the realm of common sense)?Let me be more exact then, so you don't run off on a flight of fancy about what might have happened but we don't know about it.

If an Aryan Nation moron showed up for a few minutes carrying a club outside a 99% white voting site, claimed to be protecting the voters from a threat by racist thugs, left when ordered to, and we never heard of any voters he intimidated, do you really believe that TWO YEARS later liberals would continue to point to this as an example of rampant right-wing criminality? It's bad behavior, or course, but without a single identified victim we would still be complaining that a decision not to prosecute proves a racially biased administration and Justice Department?

No. Did not happen, would not happen. Go call BS in your own back yard.

[Dan T.]

Not only that, but in in Thiebear's metaphore it was the Aryan's invadeing a black club to threaten black folks..


Er, he referred to an Aryan guy showing up WITH a club, not showing up AT a [black] club. :ols:

Look, the idiot in Philly standing there with a nightstick was really inappropriate and could certainly be considered intimidating. I'm glad he left when the cops came. But from a legal standpoint, how do you PROVE "intimidation"? I would draw another parallel. The Tea Party guys showing up outside an Obama rally armed with assault weapons in plain view could be seen as intimidating and dangerous. Inappropriate but not illegal.

[twa]

Carrying a (unlicensed) weapon at the polls is illegal right?

The weapons at the rally were not

Ask Nixon whether the cover up is worse than the crime

[Bang]

Still with this voter intimidation thing.

IF the "dems" had prosecuted the case against the two Black Panthers, they would have lost, since those two clowns never actually intimdated anyone. (Unless you count those people that just keep walking past them into the polls as being intimidated.)
They would have lost, and that would set precedent for any other nutbags who want to hang around polling places with truncheons looking menacing.

And if that had happened, I wonder what the right's compaint about it would be? That they prosecuted a case they could not win, thereby opening the door for the loons?
Really, by parroting this idiotic argument, all you do is fuel the propaganda machine that implies that the democrats are evil subversives who want to take away white rights.
And if you REALLY believe that, then you truly ARE a pinhead.

I think y'all spend too much time on "what if" and not enough on "reality".

~Bang

[JimboDaMan]

Carrying a (unlicensed) weapon at the polls is illegal right?

The weapons at the rally were not

Ask Nixon whether the cover up is worse than the crimeI dunno, it's not a firearm, not sure exactly what is and isn't legal. I'd assume you can't have a weapon within x number of feet of a polling station, but I don't know the law. What is the distance covered? What kinds of weapons? Can a guy with a limp bring a cane - sort of like a club but much bigger?

lol at "coverup". Righties are funny.

[Thiebear]

Let me be more exact then, so you don't run off on a flight of fancy about what might have happened but we don't know about it.

If an Aryan Nation moron showed up for a few minutes carrying a club outside a 99% white voting site, claimed to be protecting the voters from a threat by racist thugs, left when ordered to, and we never heard of any voters he intimidated, do you really believe that TWO YEARS later liberals would continue to point to this as an example of rampant right-wing criminality? It's bad behavior, or course, but without a single identified victim we would still be complaining that a decision not to prosecute proves a racially biased administration and Justice Department?

No. Did not happen, would not happen. Go call BS in your own back yard.

In rewatching the video i would dissagree. It was an hour at least before the guy called the cops to get him to leave. You don't say no to the cops while at a polling place with a polished club. (not a stick).
They were convicted, but then released... there was no loss or no pending loss, it was already won is the point and then given an utterly rediculous sentence that last 1 election and 1 month.

As the republicans often do, they overblow this to be the be all end all but it is a serious deal.

Something the Democrats bring up all the time: The Republicans pretending to be citizens storming the offices in Florida over the hanging chads.
another issue that should have been prosecuted to show you don't **** with the election.
Another one that is brought up all the time is the bags of votes found in the trunk of the car in Ohio. Nothing happened...
Voting machines that are tampered with: Nothing happened that was I can remember:
I have to get out the tinfoil had to mention any others that are memorable..

[JimboDaMan]

In rewatching the video i would dissagree. It was an hour at least before the guy called the cops to get him to leave. You don't say no to the cops while at a polling place with a polished club. (not a stick).
They were convicted, but then released... there was no loss or no pending loss, it was already won is the point and then given an utterly rediculous sentence that last 1 election and 1 month.

As the republicans often do, they overblow this to be the be all end all but it is a serious deal.

Something the Democrats bring up all the time: The Republicans pretending to be citizens storming the offices in Florida over the hanging chads.
another issue that should have been prosecuted to show you don't **** with the election.If memory serves me correctly you are leaving out a teeny little detail. They were convicted on a technicality because they didn't show up to contest the charge. Odds were slim of it surviving an appeal, and as I'm sure you are deliberately ignoring losing the case could have set a bad precedent.

[AsburySkinsFan]

Carrying a (unlicensed) weapon at the polls is illegal right?

Does that mean that Black Belts in Karate can't vote?

[twa]

Does that mean that Black Belts in Karate can't vote?

No, it means a voter can't carry a black belter with him to vote.:ols:

Urban legend put out by Karate fans to boost enrollment,when it is really lethal force that is the legal definition.

[Destino]

I knew this thread was going to be hijacked as soon as I saw it.

[twa]

I knew this thread was going to be hijacked as soon as I saw it.

I blame Yusuf ;)

Please don't make me watch Glenn Beck :drama:

[Baculus]

O'Keefe falsify a recording? No way!

That moron has done that before discussed on this tape. He, and some cohorts, also tried to gain access to a senator's telephone communication, and O'Keefe also tried to trick a female CNN host into a weird trap of some sort on a boat. (If this has already been said, then blame my lack of time to read the entire thread).

O'Keefe is scum, when it comes down to it. He doesn't care whose lives he affects, he doesn't care if he is honest or not. He has no ethics, and, frankly, one of his little deceits will/should land him in jail or with a lawsuit one of these days.

Almost as bad, though, are his supporters, who witlessly defend his actions, as if they are defensible in the first place. It really displays their understanding of ethics, and their desire to "win" against "the enemy" at all costs and their loathing of organizations such as NPR overrides any common sense that they might possess.

NPR is 10000x more credible and important to Americans than some two-bit punk.

[Larry]

Still with this voter intimidation thing.

IF the "dems" had prosecuted the case against the two Black Panthers, they would have lost, since those two clowns never actually intimdated anyone. (Unless you count those people that just keep walking past them into the polls as being intimidated.)
They would have lost, and that would set precedent for any other nutbags who want to hang around polling places with truncheons looking menacing.

Not sure I agree with you, there. (Or with the DoJ.)

To me, there's no rule that says that you have to produce a single person who will swear under oath to being intimidated.

To me, the way you decide the matter of "was that intimidation?" is: "Let's let a jury decide".

Show a jury the video, and ask them: If that looks intimidating to you, then he's guilty. If it doesn't, then he isn't.

[JMS]

Carrying a (unlicensed) weapon at the polls is illegal right? The weapons at the rally were not.

Do you need a license for a night stick in Philidelphia? I think they mention it because it along with his fashion sense because it makes him seem more intimidating...

I mean you can't make a man standing on a street not speaking to anybody in particular intimidating unless you make him black, put him in Camo's, and say he's brandishing a stick.




Ask Nixon whether the cover up is worse than the crime

Cover up? The case was heard and the AG's actions were taken publically in open court. If it's a cover up it's the worst one ever.

[twa]

NPR is 10000x more credible and important to Americans than some two-bit punk.

I agree, yet NPR found his actual comments on the unedited tape out of line.

Would those comments been exposed w/o O'Keefe?
Kinda like a Wiki-leaks w/o the national security issues maybe....nobody likes a rat

[Baculus]

OK, so why has the black panther case occupied 2/3 of this thread (which I just quickly browsed)?

[Larry]

OK, so why has the black panther case occupied 2/3 of this thread (which I just quickly browsed)?

Because our hijacker in chief decided that talking about a conservative "reporter" lying about NPR didn't further the conservative agenda.

[twa]

Do you need a license for a night stick in Philidelphia? .

Never been,so I don't know....I do know federal election law prohibits it and his presence in that manner.

I only added the license since I believe concealed carry is permitted (though I'm not sure how that case ended up)

Hijacker :pfft:

[Baculus]

I agree, yet NPR found his actual comments on the unedited tape out of line.

Would those comments been exposed w/o O'Keefe?
Kinda like a Wiki-leaks w/o the national security issues maybe....nobody likes a rat

Exposed? What? Did you even read the article about the edits?

NPR freaked -- that is why they did it. Just like Obama administration panicked, firing Shirley Sherrod when Breitbart, one of O'Keefe's allies, pushed another falsely edited tape.

Hmmm -- did we see a trend? Right-wingers pushing falsehoods? Yes, we do. And we have for a while.

Anyway, NPR's reaction based upon the falsely-edited tapes is irrelevant, because they are now saying they are "shocked" they were misled. They probably should actually fight, for once, instead of caving into threats and those who would lie to attack them.

http://www.care2.com/causes/politics/blog/npr-shocked-that-okeefe-video-was-edited-misleadingly/

---------- Post added March-15th-2011 at 07:41 PM ----------


Because our hijacker in chief decided that talking about a conservative "reporter" lying about NPR didn't further the conservative agenda.

Oh yes, of course. I figured as much. I noticed that he brought up "OMG PALIN!!!111!!" first chance.

---------- Post added March-15th-2011 at 07:45 PM ----------



Cover up? The case was heard and the AG's actions were taken publically in open court. If it's a cover up it's the worst one ever.

See, the Obama administration is so evil that their black panther/PeaceCorp/AmeriCorp domestic security force is covering it up!

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?pageId=69601

[Predicto]

Not sure I agree with you, there. (Or with the DoJ.)

To me, there's no rule that says that you have to produce a single person who will swear under oath to being intimidated.

To me, the way you decide the matter of "was that intimidation?" is: "Let's let a jury decide".

Show a jury the video, and ask them: If that looks intimidating to you, then he's guilty. If it doesn't, then he isn't.

Umm, no. You have to prove that the guy intended to deny people their right to vote, and you have to prove it "beyond a reasonable doubt." The fact that a guy looked intimidating to you is not enough to convict him. The fact that little old white ladies were walking past him to vote and the fact that he left when asked makes the case a loser. Even if you got a hysterical jury and they voted to convict, an appeals court would reverse that conviction for lack of sufficient evidence to meet the beyond a reasonable doubt standard.

A responsible prosecutor does not bring that case.

[twa]

Hmmm -- did we see a trend? Right-wingers pushing falsehoods? Yes, we do. And we have for a while.

Anyway, NPR's reaction based upon the falsely-edited tapes is irrelevant, because they are now saying they are "shocked" they were misled. They probably should actually fight, for once, instead of caving into threats and those who would lie to attack them.

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?pageId=69601


Do we see a trend of denial by libs of bias and illegality?...Why yes we do.

Please take him to court...it might be educational and informative.:)

[Baculus]

Do we see a trend of denial by libs of bias and illegality?...Why yes we do.

What are you talking about? What does this have anything to do with O'Keefe?

Dude, you have any understanding of ethics, or is this more trolling on your part?


Please take him to court...it might be educational and informative.:)

He already has been in court for his attempt to break into a Senator's office.

---------- Post added March-15th-2011 at 07:59 PM ----------

At least all Republicans aren't marching off an ideological cliff in their attacks on NPR/PBS:

http://thinkprogress.org/2011/03/15/chambliss-npr-valuable-service/

[AsburySkinsFan]

What are you talking about? What does this have anything to do with O'Keefe?

This is classic Rightest thinking, editing video in order to falsely represent what someone said is now "bias" not underhanded manipulation. As such Faux is biased not underhanded and manipulative, how dare you take away the one tool they have to show the reality of their narrative....I mean if they can't falsify reality how will you believe what they tell you?

[Baculus]

This is classic Rightest thinking, editing video in order to falsely represent what someone said is now "bias" not underhanded manipulation. As such Faux is biased not underhanded and manipulative, how dare you take away the one tool they have to show the reality of their narrative....I mean if they can't falsify reality how will you believe what they tell you?

Yep. Oh so true. And we know the "black panther" trope is trotted out as a defense at first chance., along with the "MSNBC false edited that guy with the gun!" defense. It's predictable, just like Fox News and others are predictably deceitful.

They really do live in a bizarro world.

[twa]

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2011/03/14/134528545/npr-okeefe-inappropriately-edited-video-execs-words-still-egregious
NPR spokeswoman Dana Davis Rehm told David late yesterday that O'Keefe "inappropriately edited the videos with an intent to discredit" NPR. Still, she added, Schiller made some "egregious statements."

As we said yesterday, those included Schiller calling the Tea Party a "weird evangelical" movement that has helped push the "current Republican Party" to become "fanatically involved in people's personal lives."

As Time magazine's James Poniewozik writes at his Tuned In blog, "the close-up look [at the longer tape] doesn't let the executive, Ron Schiller, off the hook. But it shows O'Keefe edited the short version of his video to fit his anti-NPR agenda. Explaining why both things can be true at once requires, well, a lot of context."
http://tunedin.blogs.time.com/2011/03/13/the-twisty-bent-truth-of-the-npr-sting-video/

[Baculus]

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2011/03/14/134528545/npr-okeefe-inappropriately-edited-video-execs-words-still-egregious
NPR spokeswoman Dana Davis Rehm told David late yesterday that O'Keefe "inappropriately edited the videos with an intent to discredit" NPR. Still, she added, Schiller made some "egregious statements."

]

I have NEVER seen you EVER make an issue out of all of the "egregious" statements from conservatives. Even more so, this guy, Shiller, was giving his person opinion, which he said was not that of NPR.

You are being disingenuous. More so, you are throwing out random statements without even trying to defend them. Either defend your words, or don't drive-by troll.

---------- Post added March-15th-2011 at 08:27 PM ----------

It would appear that this ginned-up video is good enough for Congressional Republicans: They are calling for an "emergency" to defend NPR and PBS.

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/03/house-gop-declare-emergencyover-npr-funding.php?ref=fpb

The GOP are ideologically spastic.

[AsburySkinsFan]

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2011/03/14/134528545/npr-okeefe-inappropriately-edited-video-execs-words-still-egregious
NPR spokeswoman Dana Davis Rehm told David late yesterday that O'Keefe "inappropriately edited the videos with an intent to discredit" NPR. Still, she added, Schiller made some "egregious statements."

That's referred to as CYA. The Right along with the Faux News clowns are screaming that NPR need to be defunded, they are just defusing this in order to take a bullet out of the guns of those who are against them.

[Baculus]

Here is point that is probably missed out of all of this: no matter the personal opinion that Schiller had about the tea party, it certainly didn't affect NPR's coverage of it, because I can Google tons of articles from public radio that lacks any sort of ideologically bent against those conservatives. There is no crusade against the Right from NPR, though, if you listened to some people you'd get the impression that NPR is 24/7 conservative bashing.

It really comes down to this: NPR is under attack for perceptions about them, and for the fact that they are one of the few radio sources that isn't right-wing controlled. It's all about power, and ideology.

[Burgold]

Also missed in this is that what Schefter did was succeed in getting a Republican drummed out of NPR potentially making the organization even more liberal then before. In any case, why does the right wing media feel it so necessary to attack conservatives who work in NPR!!!

[twa]

I have NEVER seen you EVER make an issue out of all of the "egregious" statements from conservatives. Even more so, this guy, Shiller, was giving his person opinion, which he said was not that of NPR.
defend NPR and PBS.



I wasn't aware I ever made a issue out of Shillers statements,nor am I the one whining about him being taken out of context.

I simply posted NPR's view of his statements in the unedited video...as well as a Times article....neither could be accused of being right wing

Ya got a problem with their opinions?....want me to defend them? :ols:

Hell,I ain't even defending O'keefe....so who's trolling ?

[Predicto]

Do we see a trend of denial by libs of bias and illegality?...Why yes we do.

Please take him to court...it might be educational and informative.:)


Dude, sometimes you don't even try. :doh:

[twa]

Dude, sometimes you don't even try. :doh:

When responding to a troll why bother?

[Predicto]

When responding to a troll why bother?

You are right. I'm not going to bother anymore providing substantive responses to your snarky one-line deflections and smilies. Waste of time.

[Thiebear]

[/COLOR]

See, the Obama administration is so evil that their black panther/PeaceCorp/AmeriCorp domestic security force is covering it up!

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?pageId=69601

Technically the Black Panters said this new crew was not real and a racist version of the Black Panthers.

[Baculus]

I wasn't aware I ever made a issue out of Shillers statements,nor am I the one whining about him being taken out of context.

I simply posted NPR's view of his statements in the unedited video...as well as a Times article....neither could be accused of being right wing

Ya got a problem with their opinions?....want me to defend them? :ols:

Hell,I ain't even defending O'keefe....so who's trolling ?

You initially tried to deflect the conversation to Sarah Palin, then implied that the O'Keefe video was correct since NPR executives believed it. Followed by your response, "Do we see a trend of denial by libs of bias and illegality?...Why yes we do." "Please take him to court...it might be educational and informative."

Yes, we get it. It's the same point you have in all these other sort of threads.

---------- Post added March-16th-2011 at 12:34 AM ----------


Technically the Black Panters said this new crew was not real and a racist version of the Black Panthers.

I was actually being sarcastic. :-) Unless AmeriCorp really IS evil!

[twa]

You initially tried to deflect the conversation to Sarah Palin, then implied that the O'Keefe video was correct since NPR executives believed it. Followed by your response, "Do we see a trend of denial by libs of bias and illegality?...Why yes we do." "Please take him to court...it might be educational and informative."


For someone supposedly worried about context you sure seem to miss it .

Palin was in agreement to Bur's assertion people remember manufactured gotchas post 13

I STATED NPR found his comments on the unedited tape out of line post 96

Typical Bac

[Burgold]

Palin was in agreement to Bur's assertion people remember manufactured gotchas post 13

I STATED NPR found his comments on the unedited tape out of line post 96

Typical Bac

And I agree with me and Palin (what an odd sentence), where we would disagree is what constitutes a "gotcha" moment. Some of what she has called "gotchas" seems to be defined as softball questions by any other politician.

I suspect you are correct that NPR was worried enough about the comments (edited or not) especially in the current political clime that they thought the best way to head off the **** storm was to lop off heads....

Sadly, it probably didn't matter if it was the right or fair thing to do. That said, NPR has had a really bad year from their mishandling and poor decision making in the Juan Williams' affair to this. I wonder if it's just a symptom of a magnified charged atmosphere or something else. I will say that anyone who agrees to air Schefter's work from now on after so many cases of proven fraud ought to be fired.