Only if "balanced" means reading from Eric Holder's script.
"Current and former federal officials say their hands are tied because of weak U.S. gun laws. Possessing a gun isn't a crime, unlike, say, possessing cocaine. And, in order to bring a prosecution, the government must demonstrate a straw purchaser had bad intentions." --Drivel of NPR
No, they have to demonstrate he was a straw purchaser. He was buying a gun for someone else...
"Intent" is NOT relevant.
Sure, there's more!!
"Issa and ATF whistleblowers who protested to no avail with their supervisors in Arizona say the number of Fast and Furious guns still unaccounted for could top 1,000. But authorities are telling Congress the numbers could be far lower. Documents obtained by NPR and provided to lawmakers suggest that 568 weapons tied to Fast and Furious have been located: 372 in the U.S. and 196 more in Mexico." --Holder/NPR bullshit machine
Math is hard.
Wow - liberals who get funding from liberals in government will put out propaganda protecting liberals in government.
I am SHOCKED, just SHOCKED!
Yeah, as if this never happens, either...
Conservatives who get funding from conservatives in government will put out propaganda protecting conservatives in government.
PBS does realize that taking a gun across the border is a crime right? They do know that even possessing an undeclared firearm in any border crossing point is a crime right?
I'm sorry Anony... Which public broadcasting operation that gets taxpayer funding is conservative again?
David, Holder is absolutely desperate on this one. The trail leads to him, he knows it; it could go further up the ladder, too.
So anything they can do to spin, stonewall, or lie their way out of it will be done.
I mean, even John Stuart knows what's going on here.
Read for meaning, Neomom! So PBS used some of its federal money to promote a liberal agenda.
The federal gummint under conservative regimes has funneled hundreds of millions of dollars to organizations run by political and ideological allies.
I'm not frothing at the mouth that MY tax dollars FUND those initiatives. &^#$ happens. Deal with it.
Help us with "meaning," anony.
Name a few names. To WHOM has the Bussshhhhhhhhhhheeeeeeeeeevil Gummint given 'hundreds of millions' of dollars?
Did I say Bush, Dad29? I said CONSERVATIVES. Did I say evil, Dad29? YOU made the implication.
Do your own damn research, it's on the internet. The point is that both conservative and liberal presidents use taxpayer dollars to fund their initiatives. If you oppose this ENTIRE process, regardless if the money furthers an interest you personally support, be consistent.
Private donations are wholly different than government provided funding. Amazing you can't understand the difference.
Especially with a "news" organization.
Neo: anony is consistently unable to distinguish, which is why he's a Lefty.
It's what they DO.
Dad29--You just employed Alinsky Rule #124--When you cannot refute your opponent, make %^$# up!
Neomom--"Private donations are wholly different than government provided funding."
Wow, are you that dense? Since when is taxpayer money equate to "private donations"? When did I even make that point? Read for meaning!
One more time...Taxpayer dollars is used by presidential administrations, liberal or conservative, to further an agenda directly or indirectly, whether it be National Public Radio, the Salvation Army, Catholic Charities, or organizations run by political and ideological allies. What these groups do with that money is THEIR business. I couldn't care less if conservative presidents decided to funnel federal money to religious groups for their cultural agenda, because liberal presidents will engage in the same practice.
For years, conservatives have been complaining about the "liberal tit of federal grant money" being used to "spread propaganda". Yet nary a word from you if those fund are used to promote goals you wholeheartedly support. So, if you TRULY want your tax dollars to not be "abused" in this fashion, be consistent ACROSS THE BOARD.
Awwww....WiddleAnonyLefty is frustrated!
Still waiting for you to name the names.
Just one name.
And, by the way, "churches" don't count.
Awwww, Dad29 is getting served. It's just fun pointing out how hypocritical you and NeoMom are by going bonkers when federal tax dollars are used...for programs and initiatives you oppose, but have no problem if they are given to conservative groups and religious groups to perform public services.
Methinks if Obama authorized or has authorized faith-based grants from the Department of Health and Human Resources, for example, which is legal under a 2007 Supreme Court ruling, you and NeoMom would hit the roof!
As a matter of fact, I was NOT pleased that GWB spent money on 'faith-based' groups.
OTOH, they don't have a national facility with which to spread lies, half-truths, and distortions.
Like NPR/WPR, for example.
Post a Comment