Wednesday, November 26, 2014

On investigations and trusting them

Well, so much for those officially empowered investigations carried out under intense public and media scrutiny by -- what's that, The Washington Times? -- "the only people who have heard and examined all of the evidence of all of the witnesses." Maybe Sen. Graham can help us through a little pre-holiday mix-and-match game: Which images go with which sentiments from the Free and Independent Media?

National ReviewWhen the facts didn't back their narrative, they dismissed the facts and retreated into paranoid suspicion of the legal system.

Good thing federal officials are still on the case!

Let’s hope he’s able to shed light on what happened once and for all. The victims and their families deserve both justice and the truth.

No, that can't be it. How does it look from New York Avenue?

These purveyors of ... resentment had three months to polish their false and angry narrative, with the help of a compliant media that feeds on wild sensation.

Wow, that doesn't sound like the Lindsey Graham we know. Were the purveyors waving anything in particular?

Rioters armed with automatic weapons* fired on the police and put the torch to police cars.

Maybe the Rutherford Institute could help us put it all in perspective?
What we're really faced with, and what we'll see more of before long, is a growing dissatisfaction with the government and its heavy-handed tactics by people who are tired of being used and abused and are ready to say "enough is enough."
Sure hope there aren't any Outside Agitators messing with our way of life involved, Fair 'n' Balanced Network!
“Our mission here is to protect the protestors and the American citizens from the violence that the federal government is dishing out. ... People here are scared.”
Because when the cops tell you to stand down, it's time to remember that "government is our servant, not our master":
But not all dissidents are content to submit to what we, in the Age of Obama, still insist on quaintly calling “the rule of law.” And there is a price to pay for that, too. ...  
(Ready for the giveway part?)
I myself am of the view that there is a great deal of real estate between complete submission and civil war, and that acts such as Mr. Bundy’s are not only bearable in a free republic but positively salubrious. Unhappily, those views are not shared by many in Washington, and, if I were a wagering sort, my money would be on Mr. Bundy ending up dead or in prison, with a slight bias in the odds toward death.
And I'm of the view that one can be pleased with some outcomes of that standoff (conflict scholars as a group are often kinda happy when confrontations don't end in violent death) and still ask the pro-sedition media how that bet worked out for them -- and, maybe, how they might have placed their chips in other recent encounters.
As a broad principle, I'd be happier if journalism spent less time looking for "the narrative" and more time looking for the news. Until that happy day, news outlets that insist on fitting any development into their preferred narrative should expect to be judged by the company they keep. There appear to be a few confounding factors -- who's doing the protesting and whom they're doing it to, to name two -- that warrant a little more consideration in the great narrative bunny-hop we see here.

* This would be fairly serious; one hopes it isn't just another case of the Librul Media not knowing what "automatic" means.


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home