Lewis focused on one of the 911 callers frantically relaying to the operator that he had just seen "two shadows". He postulated that Maddow has a vested interest keeping the audio of that call under wraps, because it would suggest that the establishment media that she represents got the story wrong. The caller may well have been mistaken, but still, Maddow should ask questions and do an investigative report on the discrepancies? Maybe track down and interview the caller (and other witnesses), hmm? Wouldn't that resemble journalism?
Despite such negligence and her lack of integrity, Lewis asserted that there are reasons for which he "still likes" Rachel Maddow. What reasons? Beas me. I lack even a sub-shadow of a sub-shadow of a doubt that the most disgusting, unethical, dishonest, disingenuous contemporary television "news" anchor is Rachel Maddow. More style than substance, she plays to the hilt her facade of "skeptical", "independent", "witty", "scrupulous", "idealistic", glasses-sporting hipster-nerd dynamo fighting for truth, justice, and sticking it to "The Man". This has earned her the admiration and allegiance of vapid, myopic, psuedo-intellectual trendies ... you know, trust fund brats who pretend to be vagabond hippies, and the like.
(Most of her audience, with their limited understanding of the world -- which Maddow has only exacerbated -- believe that the there is no more a totalitarian force on Earth, and no greater a threat to civil liberties, than Christianity. Thus, if their precious government were to suddenly vanish out of thin air -- depriving the world of not just roads, but of swaggering, swell-headed, fat-assed TSA agents raping and beating up innocent men, women, and children -- then their imaginary army of swamp-dwelling, "redneck", Bible-thumping, abortion clinic-bombing, bloodthirsty oppressors would immediately storm the marginalized outposts of reason and knowledge that are New England and California, savagely placing unwanted babies in good homes and assuring gay couples that now that the government's gone, they won't need it to legitimize their relationships with a piece of paper, and they're free to live their life as they see fit .)
Remember the charade of several weeks ago that was the "government shutdown"? You know, the pointless farce of a "impasse" that voices in establishment media kept wailing as "all the Republicans' fault!"? As in, the joke of an "emergency" that Obama administration tried to substantiate by declaring select national parks and monuments "closed", as if they can nullify, or outright "shut off", the autonomy of U.S. citizens and veterans to go for a stroll and stop and look at things?
Let us not parse words: war memorials in Washington, D.C. were declared "closed". The pussyfooting of the mass media -- and the outright duplicity of the likes of Rachel Maddow -- resulted in the simple facts of this scenario, let alone the gravity of it, not really registering with the American public. Take into account: On my eighth grade field trip to D.C., my friend Sean's father, Mr. Weaver, was one of our chaperones. Mr. Weaver was a veteran of the Vietnam War. During our visit to the National Mall and its outlying sites, our stop at the Vietnam Wall did not facilitate nearly enough time for Mr. Weaver to comb over the nearly 60,000 names for that of his brother who had died in the Vietnam War. So, that evening, while we were given a formal tour of the other monuments along the Potomac, Mr. Weaver and his son verged away from the group at large and made their way back to the Vietnam Wall. And there they stayed, until locating Mr. Weaver's brother's name. When they rejoined us, I couldn't have been happier for them ... in fact, I couldn't have been more proud of them; something in my gut and heart told me that I'd just witnessed someone doing the right thing, without any compromise.
So, at the age of 13, I learned: no one fucks with war veterans ... least of all some pencil-necked statist tour guide.
Thus came October 2013 and the infamous "shutdown". After the Obama administration made the decision to arbitrarily deny access to war memorials, and then a park ranger called in police when war veterans wouldn't listen to his embarrassing attempt at telling them they can't be at the memorial for the war in which they served, I applauded, vocally promoted and supported, and was encouraged by World War II veterans stepping forth and standing up for themselves.
Ever dependable, during the October 13th, 2013 broadcast of The Alex Jones Show, the D.C. veterans' protest was covered and documented in real time. Starting at 0:13 in the video below, you can see someone in some sort of police uniform (whatever the case, who does he think he is?) for some reason using his baton to push a man wearing a baseball cap, provoking him to push back. In other words, a policeman is using physical force against a protesting veteran:
If I were a journalist of any stripe, I would report on this story by, of course citing my sources and to every possible extent, identifying both parties and the reasons for their actions: what is the man in the baseball cap protesting? Who is the man in the police uniform with the baton? Who does he work for?
But if I were Rachel Maddow, I would equate World War II veterans with the Tea Party, omit the part of the video where the man in the police uniform with the baton does the pushing, and claim that he and his fellow policemen were "due to the shutdown, working without pay". I would feign disgust at the barbarism of the protesters who I'm claiming that, without qualification, attacked the police officers and affect exasperated moral indignation at what I'm implying is the "fact" that these police folk -- whoever they are and whatever their affiliation is -- are "working without pay". And I would go on with my life not caring that there is no official record of any police outfit having been denied pay -- let alone consenting to work without pay -- as a result of the "shutdown" circus I continuously harp was caused by Republicans.
But I'm Rachel Maddow, so I just spew whatever shit I think works, so long as it characterizes Democrats as good and Republicans as bad:
Of course, if you live in the cute little world that Rachel Maddow wants you to, you know not take Alex Jones seriously. After all, he's said stuff, and she's able to quote him as saying that stuff in a mocking, incredulous tone of voice. Like she does in the clip at @06:28-06:55 below:
Maddow's "expose", or whatever it can be called, of Jones was created of sheer cynicism and arrogance, and completely devoid of journalistic integrity or intellectual honesty. All she's doing is, in her energetic, quirky, leering way, signaling that she finds amusing in how its worthy of the contempt of her cartoonish cocked eye and exaggerated, disbelieving "Okayyyyyyyyy"-type facial expression. She doesn't actually have to address anything that anyone she's out to get says. She just has to, with as much feigned incredulity and whimsy as she can muster, exclaim, "THIS is The. Person. who actually thinks that when you turn on your sink, WATER(!!!), of ALL things, actually COMES OUT OF IT!!! Bwa-HA!!!"
And so, her smug, vapid, worldly, naive viewers are cued that the random premise of there being "wasps living under the Pentagon" should be equated with knowing, wondering, and asking about:
Oh, and then we have Maddow raving about how "Alex Jones believes that Obama sent the tornado". It doesn't matter to her that in the apparently damning (they're not) clips of him making such a claim (he doesn't), he's responding off the cuff to a caller, citing DARPA research and speculating as to ways in which the then-contemporary tornado could have been manipulated. No, all she has to due is crow that he's talking about "made up" stuff.
Geez, you'd think a Rhodes Scholar would be less ignorant of the military-industrial complex than that.
-- Ryan
Let us not parse words: war memorials in Washington, D.C. were declared "closed". The pussyfooting of the mass media -- and the outright duplicity of the likes of Rachel Maddow -- resulted in the simple facts of this scenario, let alone the gravity of it, not really registering with the American public. Take into account: On my eighth grade field trip to D.C., my friend Sean's father, Mr. Weaver, was one of our chaperones. Mr. Weaver was a veteran of the Vietnam War. During our visit to the National Mall and its outlying sites, our stop at the Vietnam Wall did not facilitate nearly enough time for Mr. Weaver to comb over the nearly 60,000 names for that of his brother who had died in the Vietnam War. So, that evening, while we were given a formal tour of the other monuments along the Potomac, Mr. Weaver and his son verged away from the group at large and made their way back to the Vietnam Wall. And there they stayed, until locating Mr. Weaver's brother's name. When they rejoined us, I couldn't have been happier for them ... in fact, I couldn't have been more proud of them; something in my gut and heart told me that I'd just witnessed someone doing the right thing, without any compromise.
So, at the age of 13, I learned: no one fucks with war veterans ... least of all some pencil-necked statist tour guide.
Thus came October 2013 and the infamous "shutdown". After the Obama administration made the decision to arbitrarily deny access to war memorials, and then a park ranger called in police when war veterans wouldn't listen to his embarrassing attempt at telling them they can't be at the memorial for the war in which they served, I applauded, vocally promoted and supported, and was encouraged by World War II veterans stepping forth and standing up for themselves.
Ever dependable, during the October 13th, 2013 broadcast of The Alex Jones Show, the D.C. veterans' protest was covered and documented in real time. Starting at 0:13 in the video below, you can see someone in some sort of police uniform (whatever the case, who does he think he is?) for some reason using his baton to push a man wearing a baseball cap, provoking him to push back. In other words, a policeman is using physical force against a protesting veteran:
If I were a journalist of any stripe, I would report on this story by, of course citing my sources and to every possible extent, identifying both parties and the reasons for their actions: what is the man in the baseball cap protesting? Who is the man in the police uniform with the baton? Who does he work for?
But if I were Rachel Maddow, I would equate World War II veterans with the Tea Party, omit the part of the video where the man in the police uniform with the baton does the pushing, and claim that he and his fellow policemen were "due to the shutdown, working without pay". I would feign disgust at the barbarism of the protesters who I'm claiming that, without qualification, attacked the police officers and affect exasperated moral indignation at what I'm implying is the "fact" that these police folk -- whoever they are and whatever their affiliation is -- are "working without pay". And I would go on with my life not caring that there is no official record of any police outfit having been denied pay -- let alone consenting to work without pay -- as a result of the "shutdown" circus I continuously harp was caused by Republicans.
But I'm Rachel Maddow, so I just spew whatever shit I think works, so long as it characterizes Democrats as good and Republicans as bad:
Of course, if you live in the cute little world that Rachel Maddow wants you to, you know not take Alex Jones seriously. After all, he's said stuff, and she's able to quote him as saying that stuff in a mocking, incredulous tone of voice. Like she does in the clip at @06:28-06:55 below:
Maddow's "expose", or whatever it can be called, of Jones was created of sheer cynicism and arrogance, and completely devoid of journalistic integrity or intellectual honesty. All she's doing is, in her energetic, quirky, leering way, signaling that she finds amusing in how its worthy of the contempt of her cartoonish cocked eye and exaggerated, disbelieving "Okayyyyyyyyy"-type facial expression. She doesn't actually have to address anything that anyone she's out to get says. She just has to, with as much feigned incredulity and whimsy as she can muster, exclaim, "THIS is The. Person. who actually thinks that when you turn on your sink, WATER(!!!), of ALL things, actually COMES OUT OF IT!!! Bwa-HA!!!"
And so, her smug, vapid, worldly, naive viewers are cued that the random premise of there being "wasps living under the Pentagon" should be equated with knowing, wondering, and asking about:
- 2012 Colorado movie theater shooting poster boy James Holmes' having been "treated" by a psychiatrist who'd worked for the Air Force.
- The tragic, brutal bombing of the 2013 Boston Marathon coinciding with a bomb drill.
- The 1995 Oklahoma City bombing, regarding which Maddow frivolously snorts out that Alex Jones "thinks didn't happen". First of all, Jones has never said anything of the sort. Furthermore, if Maddow were an actual journalist, like James Lane and his peers at Free Mind Films who culled together the documentary A Noble Lie, she'd interview witnesses and survivors like Glennn Wilburn and Jane Graham.
- 9/11 "never happening". It happened, and Alex Jones thinks it happened, too, and ... oh, blatherin' blatherskites, I'm waiting with bated breath for Maddow to bring all of, at once, the Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth. If anything, though, she'll just have on those snickering rats from Popular Mechanics, as being assigned by their bosses to ignore a bulk of evidence and data and make up some bullshit placeholder explanation makes them credible experts.
Oh, and then we have Maddow raving about how "Alex Jones believes that Obama sent the tornado". It doesn't matter to her that in the apparently damning (they're not) clips of him making such a claim (he doesn't), he's responding off the cuff to a caller, citing DARPA research and speculating as to ways in which the then-contemporary tornado could have been manipulated. No, all she has to due is crow that he's talking about "made up" stuff.
Geez, you'd think a Rhodes Scholar would be less ignorant of the military-industrial complex than that.
-- Ryan
No comments:
Post a Comment