Today was a banner day for Michelle Bachmann. The left's favorite target has already been the subject of a coordinated smear campaign since she recently announced her bid for the presidency. It's not like she hasn't given them enough ammo. The feisty Bachmann has been quite vocal in laying out, in no uncertain terms, the platform she plans to run on. Her prominence in the Tea Party, and her outspoken resistance to the gay marriage wave sweeping the country, has put her square in the cross-hairs (can we say cross-hairs?) of the progressive left. Not to mention her husband's.
When news came out that Bachmann had signed "The Marriage Vow", Twitter lit up like a slot machine with tweets and re-tweets of, "Bachmann vows to ban pornography!!" and, "Bachmann think blacks were better off during slavery!!!" All followed up with links to the various leftist sites that had seized onto the story. Replies and RT's naturally followed with cries of indignity from those who could not believe this crazy wingnut could be so bold, and stupid.
I noticed none of the tweeters, and very few of the internet sites ,actually linked to the "vow." I finally found it and read it. And, as I suspected, the vow neither banned pornography, nor did it tout that blacks were "better off" during slavery. But, somehow I knew that if the left had said it, it probably wasn't true.
Rev. Al Sharpton led off his MSNBC segment on the subject and actually showed a graphic of the quote:
"Slavery had a disastrous impact on African-American families, yet sadly a child born into slavery in 1860 was more likely to be raised by his mother and father in a two-parent household than was an African-American baby born after the election of the USA‟s first African-American President."
The language clearly points to data suggesting that, in 1860, a child born to black parents was more likely to be raised in a two-parent home than they are today. This section of the document was part of the "prologue" to the actual "vow" and was the 1st of several bullet-pointed qualifiers to justify the intent of the vows to follow. It's no surprise that this as the very first point and that most lefties stopped reading at that point.
The very next point went on to say:
"LBJ‟s 1965 War on Poverty was triggered in part by the famous “Moynihan Report” finding that the black out-of-wedlock birthrate had hit 26%; today, the white rate exceeds that, the overall rate is 41%, and over 70% of African-American babies are born to single parents4 – a prime sociological indicator for poverty, pathology and prison regardless of race or ethnicity."
In typical lefty literary gymnastics, they take a statement of empirical data, and turn it into a (gasp!) racist comment. I suppose if one wants to draw a correlation between growing up in a broken home vs. not growing up in one, and that having 2 parents is better than one, then you could make a cursory assumption that.....ahh screw it. Not going there. Bachmann never said "better off." The only place you will find that language is on the lefties feeds, blogs, and sites.
But, if you scream it to sheeple enough, omit the full document from the sites, and the Rev. Al Sharpton says it on MSNBC, then the message has been delivered. And few of the left's base or neutral parties are going to actually research it. Soundbites and headlines are as far as they get.
Bachamnn didn't even write it. Sure, she signed it, but I doubt the authors of the vow at The Family Leader factored in all the possible ramifications of the specific language used. Even though it was simply drawing attention to the alarming statistic that, whites(41%) and blacks(70%) have ridiculously high instances of broken homes, as one of the many justifications for the vows to follow later.
The pornography claim was equally ignorant. The section referring to that was actually in one of the vows Bachmann pledged to.
"Humane protection of women and the innocent fruit of conjugal intimacy – our next generation of American children – from human trafficking, sexual slavery, seduction into promiscuity, and all forms of pornography and prostitution, infanticide, abortion and other types of coercion or stolen innocence."Taking the unfortunate phrase, "innocent fruit of conjugal intimacy" (wow) out of the equation, anyone bothering to read this would see she was talking about CHILD PORNOGRAPHY. But, since she did sign a vow to work against a particular form of pornography, I guess the misleading headline, "Bachmann vows to ban pornography" is factually correct. And that's good enough for the character assassins to work with.
Never mind that the entire vow has enough crumbs for the leftist agenda to rail against for months. Anti-gay marriage, sharia law, abortion, etc. With all of that, they still can't resist the urge to INVENT something out of thin air and lie about it. Are the Libs so stupid that they can't see when they are being taken for a ride by their own media? It's not enough that they tow the Democrat party line, but we can expect a left-leaning spin from the MSM. But, spin is one thing. It appeals to the audience that tunes in. Overtly taking a document that is available to anyone who can navigate a Google search, and blatantly lying about the contents is a new low.
-Noxious
No comments:
Post a Comment