For Andrew Breitbart, ACORN story = Abu Ghraib + Impeachment
September 28, 2009 12:57 pm ET by Eric Boehlert
Gee, no delusions of grandeur here, right?
And imagine if the right-wing media uncovered news stories on a regular basis, they'd become insufferable. It's bad enough that they stumbled onto the ACORN hidden-camera story and are treating it as a turning point in investigative journalism, not to mention U.S. history. Fact: It's not.
But shhh, don't tell Breitbart. He's so unfamiliar with how actual journalism (and history) works that he earlier convinced himself the marginal ACORN story was this year's Abu Ghraib. And now it's morphed into and Clinton impeachment:
The left is betting that 2009 is 1998 again and that the media will help them out like last time. Mr. Obama is betting that Mr. Clinton's 1998 strategy and his resources can extricate him from this growing mess.
Yeah, Obama's (non-existent) "mess" with ACORN is just like when the U.S. Congress began voting on whether to remove Bill Clinton from office. Just give the Breitbart a couple more weeks. By then, I'm sure he'll be writing about how the ACORN story sits right along D-Day and the battle at Gettysburg in terms of pivotal moments in U.S. history.
Media Matters: The Palin chronicles
The Friday Rush: A series of conflicts
Contrary to media hype, Sarah Palin is very unpopular
A while back, I was reading some analysis of mob mentality, specifically some stuff I stumbled on regarding the psychology of lynch mobs in the South.
One of the common factors in stirring up and rationalizing lynching black men was to create victims in white women, and emphasize sexual offenses by black men. The facts were that very few of the lynchings were related to any accusation of rape, but it seemed to be the most effective emotional angle to play in justifying vigilante death sentences.
It makes me wonder, was O'Keefe's decision to toss in the underage girls from El Salvador calculated, or just an instinct? The posters here who have been convinced that ACORN is a major story all seem to focus on that part of the story, no matter how many times it's pointed out that the girls don't exist, and even the lies creating these girls were framed as some future event.
At first I thought the wingnuts who keep mentioning the child prostitutes were deliberately misleading, but now I'm not so sure. It may have triggered something subconscious that they need to believe to explain their anti-ACORN hysteria.
Remember how the media tried to characterize Monica Lewinsky as younger and more innocent than she appeared to be according to the facts?
I realize that every group likes to have a victim, or somebody less powerful that they're fighting for, but it seems the right really relies on this. Making fetuses into human beings, creating helpless victims, whether by exaggerating their innocence, or making them up from scratch (Salvadorean sex slaves, elderly death panel targets), it seems the far right spends a lot of time manufacturing make-believe victims to comfort those who don't want to see the partisanship, paranoia and racism in their hatred.
You got that right. Messing around with an intern is an impeachible offense... OK: LYING about it is... but lying about WMD's, leading us into a an unecessary war that kills thousands of our soldiers and 100's of 1000's of civilians... THAT'S sound foreign policy. (God, I hate these stupid bastards.)
Remember how the media tried to characterize Monica Lewinsky as younger and more innocent than she appeared to be according to the facts?
As I like to point out, whenever Con's start jibber-jabbering about 'values' or 'principles,' at least Democrats cheat on the wives with WOMEN of LEAGAL AGE, instead on UNDERGAED BOYS.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sactimonious, hypocritical, self righteous bastards.
(To a man, Wes. To a man.)
Sam Tanenhaus, the writer of "The Death of Conservatism" speaks of the right's politics as being "a politics of organized cultural enmity". So what we see are all of these accusatory protests with liberals, et al as the enemy, even if it contributes nothing to government or society.
And that's part of the reason why he argues about the death of conservatism. Because conservatives have allowed themselves to be discredited by their own fringe. And I submit that any conservative on this site that buys into these fringe movements is taking down conservatism and rightly so, since you all seem to be out of ideas as to how to actually help people and contribute meaningfully to society.
I.e.you putzs have actually vacated the playing field to Democrats by concentrating on these manufactured side issues. But keep it up to the detriment of our democracy.
Breitbart is trying to be the new David Brock, since Brock flipped sides and started this website, among other things.
Remind them that things like selling arms to Iran and lying a country into war are things worth investigating.
Of course, those are republican scandals
They are also out of ideas and have zero, zip, nada, zilch and bupkis to contribute to society right now. They've ceded all credibility to the loonies.
Bunch of cowards.
Say, if Polanski beats his rap, maybe he can team up with O'Keefe and REALLY do a child sex prostitution sting video about ACORN (sick joke, I'm sorry). At least the filming will be better. I don't think that Roman can do anything about O'Keefe and Giles' rotten acting though.
For him to pass judgment on the mainstream medias coverage of the ACORN smear speaks volumes about him.
The only reason any of these right wings hacks care one bit about
ACORN is it's a way to make Obama look shady and radical.
Wait till the lead up to the mid term elections next year then the 2012 election and watch the attacks rise to a new level.