May 31, 2010

More fake outrage and lies over President Obama and Memorial Day

Just when you think the ridiculous fake outrage from Republicans over President Obama’s decision to mark Memorial Day at a ceremony at Abraham Lincoln National Cemetery in Elwood, Ill. Instead of at Arlington National Cemetery can’t get any more bizarre, it does.

Apparently, right-wing loon blogger and Anne Coulter-wannabe Pamela Geller has embellished a story that there was a “skirmish” between the Secret Service, representatives of Louis Farrakhan and the press pool during the Memorial Day weekend. She also claims that the press pool was held hostage by Farrakhan’s “Nation of Islam paramilitary” group until it was ended by a “Rev. Gary Hunter, a Baptist minister in Motown who writes and blogs for the Detroit Times.”

I have no idea who Gary Hunter is, but there has not been anything called “The Detroit Times” for more than 100 years. Geller has made up some truly outrageous and slimily lies about Obama in the past, and she has continually tried to connect Obama and Farrakhan and paint Obama as a Muslim.

This is just one more attempt to push that debunked lie.

We know what a slim ball Geller is, but it’s sad when other people pick up on it, like Michigan’s busiest rightwing blogger - the so-called “Blogprof.” You would think a guy from Michigan would know there is no such thing as the Detroit Times, but he has never let a few facts get in the way of a good smear.

It’s sad that a guy who claims to be a Christian engages in these kinds of false smears, but that is just as outrageous as his claim to be a professor. No one can put out that much copy without it being their full-time job. I know some good, motivated reporters who don’t put out that much copy in a day. Granted, it’s easier to write fiction than actual factual stories, but it still leaves little time for anything else.

He knows he can put out these fairly tales and never be challenged because the first time anyone does, he bans them.


Not Anonymous said...

I see that you're playing ignorant again. The Detroit Times has been out of business. However, there was another called the Detroit Metro Times and it's since been shortened to the Metro Times.

The Rev. Gary Hunter is Detroits version of the Rev. Al Sharpton.

But then, I suspect you knew all of this and are just playing dumb to say something stupid....or maybe you just that stupid.

Anonymous said...

Not Anon: These are the journalistic gaffs that happen when ideologically-driven practitioners deal in half-truths.

It really gets good when they start reporting on one another. Kinda the Jerry Springer of the blogisphere.

Communications guru said...

Sorry, anonymous, there is a difference between the Detroit Times and the Detroit Metro Times, which is called the Metro Times. I can’t find any reference via Google on The Rev. Gary Hunter and Detroit, prior to this incident, nor can if find a reference to Hunter and the Metro Times.

But, of course, I see you ignore the fact that some right wing nut is trying to tie Obama to Louis Farrakhan and the Nation if Islam on nothing.

Communications guru said...

There are no “journalistic gaffs” in my post, Silverfiddle, and on the rare occasion I do make one, it’s corrected. Here’s the big difference between my blog and the rightwing tool’s blog: my blog can stand up to scrutiny by people who disagree with me, and I don’t censor people I disagree with like he does.

Johnny C said...

I would argue most right wing blogs make things up or if you want to be kind to the right wing blog sphere they engage in heavily editing to a story.

What Guru highlight is that the right wing is so desperate to create any scandal to tie around this president, who cares the Detroit Times and a story about Gary Hunter doesn't exist?

When idiots like internet racist aka not anonymous will eat it up without doing their own fact checking.

Not Anonymous said...

silverfiddle. This blog would be doing well to give half truths, but I suspect you're talking about the people in Chicago that reported about this stand off between the press and the "mother ship" leader.

That reporter from the NY Times I'd never heard of until she was called on at Obama's press conference. Now she's reporting about the Detroit Times and Gary Hunter. It's interesting that it's the New York Times, a liberal rag and Farrakhan, a liberal nutjob and his henchmen. Yet, somehow, this blog thinks its Republican pushing this story.

By the way, don't believe him about banning someone from this blog. Shortly before I started commenting here, I'd read past posts of this blog and there was a guy that was banned and his name and address were put on this site as well. After he was banned, Guru was calling everyone by that persons name.

You're wise to have a screen name that is not your own real name. Others were avoiding their names on here as well because of guru's not respecting others privacy. They were posting as "Anonymous" so I started posting as "not anonymous" to distinguish myself from all of the anonymous ones here.

If you want information, this is not the place to be. But if you want to see idiocy at its' best, this is the ideal place to come for a laugh.

Johnny C said...

Thanks for highlighting my point my point I.R. you half wits on the right would swallow anything regardless the overwhelming glaring fuck ups within that piece. You notice when right winger like not A. can't defend something he quickly change the subject i.e. the story claims she got the information from Detroit Times see how not change it to New York Times? Not Any.being the easily led piece of shit that he is did it so he justify the lie he reads from shit blogs like Theblogprof. If you want to know why conservative blogs suck look no further to people like not anonymous, guy wouldn't know the truth if it dump a Mcdonald's milkshake on his head.

Communications guru said...

More lies from anonymous. If there are “half truths” and lies from me they would be easy to spot and debunk, but anonymous can’t so he gets frustrated and stoops to the false personal smears. There are a few examples of that in this very thread, but there are many more elsewhere.

The NYT is conservative like the rest of the media, but the fact remains President Obama is not a Muslim - even though that should not matter - and he has no connection with Farrakhan. That was what the rightwing nut job was trying to do with that post, and the Republican noise machine picks it up and runs with it no matter how untrue and bizarre it is. The fact is there is no such publication as the Detroit Times, and I have no idea who Gary Hunter is.

I banned brett - which is probably you anyway, anonymous - after repeatedly warning him time after time to stop with a certain disgusting smear. He declined, and I went through with my promise. He can come back anytime if he apologizes. I will stand your false personal smears to a point, anonymous, but there is a line. I will give you ample warning if you cross that line. Unlike the so-called “blogprof” no one will be banned because someone disagrees with me.

No, “Others were avoiding their names on here” because they are anonymous cowards like you and want to use false smears anonymously that you don’t have the balls to say to someone’s face. Unlike you, I will not write something I’m not afraid to say to someone’s face, and that’s why I put my name to everything I write.

Anonymous said...

No one is truly anonymous on the internet. A dedicated and knowledgeable person can find the identity of anyone.

I surf the left mostly for laughs and to see what they're up to. Most of it is just regurgitated MSNBC garbage.

I laugh at all kookery, regardless of where it comes from: Right or Left.

Communications guru said...

Perhaps you are right, and although I consider myself a dedicated and knowledgeable
person, that dedication isn’t focused on unmasking some cowardly serial liar like
anonymous. Again, I was raised to believe you don’t say or write something you’re not
man enough to look the person in the eye and say. Needles to say, I am proud of what I
write, and it can stand up to a little criticism. That’s why I put my name to it.

“Regurgitated MSNBC garbage?” You must be thinking of faux “news” that was invented to take the media even farther right.

You’re not going to find any “kookery” here.

Not Anonymous said...

The half truths and the lies are easy to spot and they've been pointed out by myself and others. You denying them doesn't make them any less lies or half truths. Actually, if something is only half truth, that means the other half is false wihich is untrue or in your case, mostly lies.

The New York Tims is not conservative. The only person on the planet that says that is you. Even liberals admit it's a left wing paper and those on the paper even call themselves liberal.

I have not seen anything other than the reporting on the thing with Farrakhan. No blogs (other than this one claiming it's something that I haven't read anywhere), no commentaries. Nothing that indicates it's a "right wing story".

The story that I did read was that Obama was at a cookout in Farrakhans' neighborhood, which is just a couple of blocks from Obama's place. There were people outside on the sidewalk. Some were in front of Farrakhans house. His security team, the Nation of Islam, confronted people when someone's toes stepped on the grass in front of Farrakhan's house. They apparently thought that the crowd was there because of him (Farrakhan).

You blew this up into a right wing conspiracy.

Communications guru said...

Anonymous is following the Republican strategy if you’re going to tell a lie, tell a big one.

You nor anyone else has ever demonstrated that I lied or told a half truth, and no matter how many times you tell that lie its still nor true.

The New York Times is conservative. In fact, like the media in general, it’s as conservative as the corporation that owns it.

Are you serous? You have “not seen anything other than the reporting on the thing with Farrakhan. No blogs (other than this one claiming it's something that I haven't read anywhere), no commentaries. Nothing that indicates it's a "right wing story".

Are you that big a liar, or are you just stupid? Ever heard of Google? Here’s a link to the Michigan liar pushing it, and that’s just one of many.

“I blew this up into a right wing conspiracy?” No, the Ann Coulter and the wimp “blogprof” did that by trying to paint Obama as a Muslim and an associate of Farrakhan; just one more attempt to smear Obama.

Not Anonymous said...

I don't read the blogprof and I have seen nothing from Ann Coulter on this story. But I admit, I haven't spent anytime in front of the television the past five days.

Contrary to yours and Little Johnny's accusations, I don't read a lot of blogs. I read news. I don't even read the comments at the end of the story. Just the news reports. Now, those could be blogs since there is no such thing as a reporter any more. Reporters don't report they repeat and interject their opinions either directly or indirectly with implications or assumptions into their stories and claim to be reporters.

Communications guru said...

I’m not asking to read the “blogprof.” I would not ask anyone to suffer that fate. You just need to read the one headline I linked to debunk your claim that no rightwing blog is pushing this false smear. Anyone that can use Google can easily debunk your lie.

No one but you said a thing about TV, and as far as I know it’s not on TV, yet.

Again, anonymous, I know of no one who comments here as “Little Johnny.” I’m not asking you to “read a lot of blogs.” But to say I “have not seen anything other than the reporting on the thing with Farrakhan. No blogs (other than this one claiming it's something that I haven't read anywhere), no commentaries. Nothing that indicates it's a "right wing story" is just one more lie from you, anonymous.

No, Reporters report. That’s one reason I’m no longer a reporter.