NPR and CNN: Hypocrites on The Liar Network (This Blog Right Again, Proven within Hours)

Foresight is my specialty. Look at the article earlier today about Alan Colkmes and the truly contemptible NPR. What did I tell you the LEFT was going to say about the exposure of NPR as a left wing, partisan organization that should not have Federal funding? Yes, I told you that you could rely on Alan Colmes to tell lyou the leftist talking point for the day (already rendered completely absurd by the resignations of the NPR CEO and the chief fund raiser involved in the undercover video? I told you that Colmes had already described the leftist position, which is that James O'Keefe is a conservative activist who lied to "trap" poor NPR into revealing who they really are, and into revealing the absurdity of providing them with taxpayer funds that could be applied t the deficit.

Quick cut to the partisan, leftist hacks at CNN, The Liar Network. What did CNN have to say? Right, as I was. CNN merely expanded upon the leftist line that Colmes, and I, had already previewed for you. First, there was the argument that the people doing the undercover vido had "lied" (horrors), and were "unethcial" (a CNN lie, as I will shortly demonstrate). Then--I could never make this up--a CNN HLN anchor was taking the position that a CNN/HLN "reporter" would never lie like this to get a story, followed by the SAME anchor stating how much she thoght was revealed by the SCOTT WALKER "prank" that she considered really valuable in discrediting Walker (another lie, but I can only cover somany lies in one article).

That is the point, is it not? As I told you i my earlier article, CNN reported the Scott Walker "prank" IN DETAIL (replaying short, out of context statements) about every half hour. At no time did CNN say that this kind of "prank" was based on an "unethical" LIE. In fact, beyond simply approving of the deception, CNN was not interested in how and who got to Scott Walker to make the taped phone conversation. All CNN was interested in was what Scott Walker had said on the tape, and how dumb Scott Walker was to fall for such a deception. Can you spell lHYPOCRITE. CNN people are the worst hypocrites to ever walk the Earth, on two legs or four (along with the rest of the mainstream media and other leftists). They wil lcontradict themselves WITHIN HOURS OR DAYS--or,in the case of that one woman, within minutes or seconds. That is because CNN is ONLY interested in agenda, and they care nothing for either truth or consistency. My older daughter, in Boston, Mass., is an Obama supporter--left leaning and surrounded by leftists. She assures me that everyone knows that CNN is partisan, and whyam I so upset.? What can I say? Outrageous hypocrites--especially sanctimonious ones accusing OTHERS of hypocrisy, as CNN does--upset me. My contempt for CNN is beyond all bounds (as is my contempt for NPR and the rest of the mainstream media).

Still doubt me? Don't. You can't help seeing the CNN hypocrisy. They were hardly reporting this story, and still are not reproting the WORDS on the tape the way they did every half hour with the much lesser story involving Scott Walker (lesser, because he said nothing different from what he has said in public). But the CEO of NPR, AND the executive involved in the undercover tape, both resigned. And Congress was talking about it as showing that the Repubicans were right to want to defund NPR (as the tape said would be GOOD for NPR). This meant that CNN, and the rest of the mainstream media, HAD to cover the story. But what "stor" did they cover? Did they cover the "story" of the TAPE, and what was said. Don't be silly. They only covered the story of the RESIGNATIONS, and tghe reaction to those resignations and the tape. Otherwise, CNN would not have covered what was said on the tape at all, and stil is avoiding that as much as possible (as they did the ACORN vidoes).

Yes, CNN tried to label this "tactic" "unethical", as I told you this morning would be the leftist reactioin. But the story was beyond that. It merely made CNN look like the partisan, dhishonest, hypocritical partican hacks they are. However, it is another CNN LIE that this is "unethcial". CNN, of course, did not cite to any "journalistic" "ethical rules" that were broken (as such ethical rules exist for lawyers, with the force of law). No one LICENSES "journalists". ANYONE can be a "journalist". Yes, I am a "journalist" in the sense that I can report whatever I want to report, and no one can "citae" me for violating any ethical "rules". CNN made it up. That, of course, is what CNN does.

Back up. Okay--because of the First Amendment, if for no other reason--there are no binding ethical rules for "journalists". Is not there something wrong with lying to get an undercover video? The answer if NO--so long as no law is broken (and CNN has no problem with laws being broken, like with Wikileaks). In fact, the mainstream media pretty much ridiculed attempts to make it some sort of crime to get access to a pubic official (lilke Governor Walker) by means of a LIE (attempts which I did not, and do not, support, unless the intent of the lie is some sort of government disruptionn). Did I tell you that the people of CNN are HYPOCRITES? I know I did. How can it be "unethical" to get information by a LEGAL "lie"?

You think it is? Well, you should look at the old movies on Turner Classic Movies. I think it appplies to modern movies as well, but I watch few of them. Journalists routinely LIE to get a story. I would say Clark Gable did it every time he played a journalist. Then there is Lois Lane, as in the comic books and on the old Superman TV show. Would she stop at a LIE? Not on your life. And no peeps about "unethical". You say that is fiction? Well, what about all of those undercover stings, where the POLICE lie? You mean the police can lie to get the bad guys, representing the government, and "journalists" can't? You have got to be kidding. Let us keep going. Remember all of those "undercover" stories that TV "news' magazine shows used to do? You know the kind. Mehcanics or gas stations have a racket, and "journalists" take a car in and LIE about who they are. That is just one of a hundred situatiions where journalists lied. Then there is Michael Moore. I actually saw "Bowling for Columbine"--an ANTI-AMERICAN mmovie rather than an anti-gun movie. How did Michel Moore get an interview with Charlton Heston? He LIED--severely misrepresented himself..

Nope. It is CNN that does the EVIL lies--the partisan ones masquerading as "journalism". There is simply no excuse for saying it is "unethical" for a "journalist" to lie to get a story. In individual circumstances, of course, soem lies may be bad things (if they hurt people unjustifiably, or otherwise aid a harmful act, like interviewing a grieving widow). But the idea that a lie to get a story is "unethical" is a CNN Orwellian Big Lie. CNN made it up. And CNN routinely reports information obtained by lies, or even traitorous acts. Thus, CNN not only lies, but is composed of HYPOCRITES.

P.S. Note, as usual, that the above has neither been proofread nor spell checked (my bad eyesight).