CNN, The Liar Network: When Did You Stop Beathing Your Wife? (The Mainstream Media Narrative on Bachmann)

I bet yo thought I was exaggerating when I previously told you that the mainstream media--including, it turns out, Fox News) is fond of asking questions that cannot be answered (literally) without hanging yourself. The classic law school example, and I have seen it often in my former life as a trial lawyer is: When did you stop beating your wife? You will note that answering the question at all admits that you have beaten your wife. I saw the CNN morning anchorwoman interview Michle Bachmann this morning and she almost LITERALLY asked that question--changing the words to fit the situation and present mainstream meedia narrative. Yes, you DO know that UNFAIR nrrative: that Michele Bachman is some sort of Joe Biden, who canot help from making misstatements and gaffes every single day. See Monday's articles, where I showed that Michele Bachmann's alleged misstatements are hardly in a league with those made by President Obama--much less Joe Biden (who said, with hardly a mainstream media peep, that FDR went on television to explain the 1929 stock market crash--Biden forgettting that televison had not yet been invented and that FDR was not President at the time of the stock market crash).


Here is the question: "A fact-checking group has found that 18 of 26--lol--of your statements it examined were false. WERE THESE JUST MISSTTEMENTS, OR WERE THEY INTENTIONAL."


I could never make this up. YOU try to figure out how AnYONE can answerf that without supposedly admitting that almost every statement the person mkes is false. "When did you stop beating your wife?"


What did Michele Bachmann do? Well, I would have ATTACKED the question, and I believe Bachmann is going to either have to do that or sTOP giving interviews to CNN and MSNBC. Not of mention Chris Wallace. But Bachmann handled it really well, when you consider that she has obviusly been told not to directly attack the questions. or the reporter.


Waht Bachmann said was: They were obviusly just misstatemetns, and not what the American people are concerned about. What lthe American people want to hear is how we are gonig to get jobs in this country, and get the economy moving again. Since the reporter had not listed the SUBSTANCE of the alleged falsehoods, this answer was harmless to Bachmann, even though it tacitly admitted that she had made lots of false statements.


This is especially true because The Liar Network then made its AGENDA obvious. The next question was whether the CNN/MAINSTREAM MEDIA NARRATIVE out thre (not put that way, of course) was not a major distraction to her campaign. Bachmann had no trouble with that question, because the only DISTRACTGION is the refusal of CNN and the rest to let her make her case (in favor of concentrating on these alleged "gaffes"). What would you do after Michele Bachmann refused to get flustered, and simply said that she was concentrating on the REAL ISSUES the American people are interested in, and therefore it is not a distraction. What the CNN reporter did (The Liar Network, remember) was to say, TWICE (after two perfectly reasonable attempts by Bachmann to answer the stupid question): "Well, I hear you, but it has to be a distraction for people to be talking about nothing but your false statements" (or words to that effect). I could never make lthis up. After Bachmann again reasonably ansered THIS, the reporter repeated AGAIN: "I hear you, but......" Michel Crichton ("Airframe") would again be proud of how accurately pegged these people (mainstream media). The reporter was NOT INTERESTED in INFORMATIN (as Bachmann well knew). She was only interested in forcing Bachmann to BREAK DOWN and sy somehting stupoid. The ONLY answer the reporter was going to accept was: "Yes, the distraction is terrible. I don't know how I can go on. My campaign has suffered a death blow, and YOU will get the credit for it from your similarly propagandist cohorts int he rest of the mainstream media."


Nope. This is digraceful stupp. It is EVIL stuff (when you LIE, and claim to "hear" an answer in which you are obviously not interested, because it is not the answer you want). There is a reason CNN EARNED the designation as The Liar Network. I assurel you that Bachmann did NOT "evade" the questin. Thereporter did not even accuse her of evading the question. The reporter simply did not like the answer, because it did not fit the NARRATIVE being pursued.


As Usual, I am not calling for a BOYOCOTT of CNN, because you are already doing that--without even being, for the most part, consciously aware of it.


P.S. No proofreading or spell checking (bad eyesight)