Anti-gun Bias At The Washington Post... Surprising?

Sailorcurt over at Captain Of A Crew Of One

Caught this gem of media bias-

Via Bitter, we discover this piece of...um...reportage...regarding [Virginia] Lobby day. Bitter's post focused on the anger of the anti-gun attendees which I commented upon in my original post; however, something different in the article caught my eye:

Hundreds of advocates flooded the state Capitol on Monday to urge the Virginia General Assembly to enact reforms on such issues as the environment, immigration and gun control.

...

Gun-control advocates, including survivors of the April 16 shooting rampage that took the lives of 32 victims at Virginia Tech, poured into a Senate committee meeting to support a bill that would require background checks for all gun-show sales. They then staged a "lie-in," lying on their backs outside the Capitol to draw attention to gun deaths in Virginia last year.

...

Many gun-rights activists also showed up at the committee meeting -- some wearing guns -- and came in force to watch the protest.

Notice the carefully crafted use of terms designed to give a visual of "hundreds" of anti-gun protesters "pouring" into the capital. And then the weak mention of "many gun-rights activists."

One is left with the distinct impression that the gun rights activists were in the minority.

This is prima facia evidence of the bias of the media in reporting. This piece was carefully crafted to paint a misleading picture. They didn't report anything factually inaccurate. In their account of "hundreds" they lumped the gun-control proponents together with environmentalists and other activists to maintain technical accuracy. No, it wasn't an outright lie, but this is a prime example of "spin." Carefully selecting phrases to paint a misleading or inaccurate picture.

Gun rights supporters outnumbered the anti-gun forces by AT LEAST two to one. Not only that, but the anti-gun groups freely admitted that they were actively busing people in from all over the state to bolster their numbers. Every gun rights activist that was there got there on their own motivation, on their own dime and of their own volition.

Media bias? What media bias?


THE BLOG ENTRY

Benazir Bhutto Assassinated- GOOD RIDDANCE!

All over the news today is the story of Bhutto being assinated. If you read these articles it would seem that this is bad news. It's not, it's actually good news!

Benazir Bhutto was a far left socialist and (as most socialist are) was corrupt as they came. Her fight for democracy was actually a smoke-screen for pushing Pakistan to communism.

She (and her husband) were corrupt as they came. She stole BILLIONS of dollars from Pakistan. She had to flee Pakistan to escape corruption charges. Now, these accusations could be written off as political attacks except that Switzerland acknowledges (and convicted her of) money laundering through Swiss banks AND Poland admits:

"...that Benazir and her husband got $2 million in kickbacks for the purchase of 8,000 tractors in a 1997 deal. These were illegal commissions paid by the tractor company in return for agreeing to their contract."

There's much more evil to this woman than this but you won't see it mentioned in the "BOO HOO" fest that the media outlets are having.

Born Again Redneck has a good post on her.

The world is a better place without her.

What Media Bias?

Ravenwood hits the nail on the head-

In 2001, President Bush makes a state visit to Mexico. During the visit, Mexican President Vicente Fox gave Bush a pair of Ostrich skin boots especially made for Fox, his bodyguards, cabinet members, and friends.

In 2007 the bootmaker was arrested in Mexico for having skins and boots made from endangered species. The CNN headline:

Bush's bootmaker arrested for illegal skins