CBS 2 is proud to bring together resident and community leaders for a town hall meeting to talk about ways to keep everyone safe...Let me guess. The consensus was for more "gun control."
The guest list for the invitation-only meeting included about 70 very high-profile members of our community who were tapped specifically because of their expertise or insights into gang culture or law enforcement.
Among them were: Chicago Police Supt. Jody Weis, the Rev. Jesse Jackson, Father Michael Pfleger of St. Sabina Church, Chicago School Board President Rufus Williams, Jesus Garcia, president of the Little Village Development Corporation, and CBS 2 legal analyst Irv Miller.
"Invitation only"? You mean it was a private "public meeting"? Nothing like stacking the panel with rabid advocates and keeping out alternative thought to reach a foregone conclusion.
Because when you hold open public meetings, who knows what unexpected things might happen?
CBS 2, you have nothing to be proud of. Decent "Authorized Journalists" would be shamed at presenting manipulated and engineered events as "news." You have demonstrated for all to see that you are mere propagandists, lapdogs of government as opposed to watchdogs. This is absolutely disgusting, absolutely contemptible, and I'd be interested to see what kind of complaints could be filed with the FCC concerning abuse of your broadcast license.
"Speaking Truth" indeed. I guess just because Felicia Middlebrooks says "there's no shortage of leadership and ideas in this room" we should believe her, especially the part about "compelling dialog, open and honest." Still, when she talks about "leaving with a mandate and making some radical changes," her credibility does go up a notch.
No audience manipulation going on either, what with the melancholy piano solo in the film clip, the sympathetic announcer, the crafted script. Still, it's a wonder no one saw the irony of the segment with Blair Holt and "his bright future snuffed out," particularly with Snuffy "I didn't know it meant that" Pfleger on the panel.
[Via HZ]
4 comments:
"The guest list for the invitation-only meeting included about 70 very high-profile members of our community who were tapped specifically because of their expertise or insights into gang culture or law enforcement."-from the lie sheet announcing the event.
If their expertise and insights are so damn good, why after decades in positions of power and influence do they have the problem they have? Whoever wrote that and didn't notice the contradiction either has a break with reality, which makes them psycotic, or they are intentionally lying and hoping the average citizen is psychotic enough to believe it.
"Invitation only"? You mean it was a private "public meeting"? Nothing like stacking the panel with rabid advocates and keeping out alternative thought to reach a foregone conclusion.
Yeah, it has the same feel as the PPP's -Public Private Partnerships- only the money-grabbing, anti-Americans need apply. A simple track-back through the money trail will reveal the leech's end-game.
Since the Emma Gee debacle, Snuffy Pfleabag has been much on my mind of late. How is calling for the death of a gun shop owner by name different from calling for the death of a judge by name, in the legal realm?
Gasp! You mean they're not considered equal? The end (of our rights) justifies the means(pirited urgings of a demagogue for mob rule and a modern lynching)?
They want radical changes? I guess incrementalism is out the window because when they push, we push back these days.
Didn't Bill Clinton say "when the Founders got together they came up with a pretty radical Constitution and Bill of Rights"?
I don't think that's the radical these people want. They want the second part of the quote: "When people abuse a right you have to move to limit it."
IT, not THEM. The right, not the people who abuse it. And by that bit of semantics, they end up limiting EVERYONE.
For a little while...
Post a Comment