Entangled in Martha's Vineyard


The Outfoxed gals have a new crusade: to defend lying liars. With J$P Video!

The newshounds (another fine product from the Outfoxed cabal) have discovered a new "victim"--another innocent waif unjustly put upon by the evil tentacles of Fox News. They're already on the record supporting plagiarist/holocaust-denier/fraudulent-Indian Ward Churchill, but now they have bigger fish to fry. Yes, they are rushing to the defense of their new favorite convicted felon, Martha Stewart. Not a great surprise, since Stewart was convicted of lying, and the newspoodles undoubtedly feel great empathy.

In their desperate campaign to rehabilitate The Liar, nancy comes to the plate:
Quinn also sneered that Stewart will resume getting her $900,000 salary that was suspended while she was in jail -- jealous, Brigitte?

and a few sentences later:
Folbaum listed things Stewart will be able to do under house arrest, including collect her monthly salary (which he sneered was "not too shabby").

Other than the fact that nancy's "learn-a-word-a-day" calendar recently came to the "sneered" page, what do these quotes tell us? Not much about Fox News, but a lot about our favorite newspup. Nancy must have mastered the psychic technique of remote viewing, because neither Quinn nor Folbaum was even on-screen when nancy caught them "sneering"!



Transparent lies are not a good way to serve the cause. So tail-wagger Melanie finds a different way to shill for The Liar. Her specialty seems to be selective omission. She rails about anti-Martha talk on Cavuto's show, citing examples such as this:
Participant Peter Johnson, Jr., said Stewart's making a "serious error," that she "should be working at an orphanage." He said "it's about redemption now."

But Melanie is careful to omit the first part of Johnson's sentence:

JOHNSON: She earned the house--the house is not the product of ill-gotten gains--and I wasn't very happy about her prosecution to begin with...

Then Melanie lets slip the hound template for distorting FNC coverage of The Liar:
Fox's audience was left with the impression that Martha Stewart is a pampered, rich woman who is getting special treatment over and above what "the folks" would get. This impression...will be, repeatedly reinforced.

But it's the tail-waggers who are doing the reinforcing. And the way to do that is to use the invisible man technique to avoid mentioning anything that doesn't fit their frame. Just a few examples of many:

From Hannity and Colmes, March 4:
SEAN HANNITY: They couldn't convict her on what they wanted to convict her on, so they convicted her about lying on a case they couldn't find her guilty of. That bothers me. That is an overaggressive prosecution....I'm sorry, this is so superfluous, this is so petty, so arbitrary....This is selective prosecution, this is overly aggressive, and they just tried to make an example out of her.
ALAN COLMES: It kills me to agree with Hannity on this, but I think he's right....She was not a threat to society. Is society better off because she served her term?
MARY PREVOST: Both prosecutors and defense attorneys think this was ridiculous.

From Heartland, March 5:
JOHN KASICH: Did you think she should have gone to jail in the first place? I really didn't think so.
JONATHON HOENIG: Absolutely not, and that's really the thing. She was railroaded from the start. She didn't trade on inside information; it was a legal stock sale. And she was given a real raw deal, and that's why I respect her. She served her time with class, and she's back working. A terrific lady...

Then there were these comments by Neil Cavuto. Plus several appearances by savemartha.com, including this one. And all of these examples have something in common:
  • Heartland segment: not reported by the newshounds.
  • SaveMartha.com segments: not reported by the newshounds.
  • Cavuto's comments: not reported by the newshounds.
  • Hannity and Colmes segment: not reported by the newshounds. Even though it was the lead story. Even though the doggies posted not one, not two, but three separate articles on that particular broadcast. Somehow there just wasn't room to squeeze in any of that Martha Stewart discussion.

A pretty shameful display of dishonesty, but then it is the newshounds. Nobody should be surprised when these defenders of The Liar get caught doing it themselves.

posted: Mon - March 7, 2005 at 02:27 PM       j$p  send 

Mike
The newshounds preach to the choir - a small group of people(?) who are so mad about losing that they close their minds to all the good that is happening. They hope for Bush to fail so they can say "I told you so" - but successes keep happening and they are totally frustrated. They block any possible IP's of dissenters like me (and apparently J$ also) and keep patting each other on the back while the majority (we the winners) are laughing at them.
March 7, 2005, 10:32:33 PM EST – Like – Reply


johnny dollar
Well they block me sometimes. Sometimes I can post a comment, sometimes I just get a screen that sez I am not permitted to post comments. I don't know if it's on a thread-by-thread basis, or hound-by-hound, or just rank incompetence on their part. But I'll play along with their little game.
March 7, 2005, 11:51:16 PM EST – Like – Reply