Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

121 Views

CNN has been having a bad week. Not only is it experiencing a ratings slump that puts the former cable news giant at the public access channel level, but it’s been the subject of a series of videos from the Left’s least favorite video producer, Project Veritas. Seems the Left doesn’t like it when James O’Keefe and his merry band of videographers expose their antics, almost as if the Left is doing something shady and dishonest…

And, as a result, Project Veritas is eeeeevilllllll!

Or are they? Let’s dig a little deeper, shall we?

Project Veritas

What the Left thinks it means – a group of dishonest right-wingers who selectively edit footage to make the Left look bad

What it really means – a group of people doing what the media used to do before they became Leftist lapdogs

Journalism has had its share of investigative reporters, raking through the muck to find the kernel of a story that would bring the powerful and corrupt to heel. Back in its heyday, “60 Minutes” did stunning exposes on dishonest brokers in the corporate sector. This style of “guerrilla journalism” made people like Mike Wallace feared in the deepest, darkest corners of companies because they never knew if or when they would be the next target and be caught on camera trying to defend the indefensible. “60 Minutes” gave rise to “Dateline NBC” and “20/20” and Geraldo Rivera, who took the practice to new heights, and lows as the reporters got disgraced or the companies started catching onto their shtick.

Then, something happened: journalism became PR for the Left. No longer would investigative reporters dig for sources to expose Left-leaning crooks and liars because it would hurt their careers behind the scenes. Just print what the nice DNC press release says, write a scathing piece about how evil Republicans are, and cash the checks. It was simple, albeit dishonest, work. Conservatives and independents, including your humble blogger, cited frequent examples of Leftist bias in media reporting, but these examples were brushed aside as paranoia, ignorance, or even denial of the “fact” the truth skews to the Left.

That changed when James O’Keefe decided to see what he could find behind the veneer of Leftist organizations, starting with ACORN. One series of videos later, and the Left was knocked back as one of its lesser-known branches got caught red-handed being dishonest and downright corrupt. Since then, O’Keefe started Project Veritas and released several other video series that have exposed Google, Facebook, and now CNN. Due to previous practices, critics have labeled the group as dishonest for “selectively editing” videos and engaging in dishonest tactics to try to gain visibility. Some have gone so far as to say they engage in disinformation.

To be fair, some of this criticism is valid, as they have made factual errors in their reporting and have skewed their stories to fit an agenda, namely making Leftists look like buffoons. Having said that, Project Veritas has done something their critics hate: they’ve posted raw, unedited footage of their encounters. In other words, they brought receipts, to use the slang the kids use today. Even so, Project Veritas has gained a reputation (in Leftist circles, at least) as slanted, dishonest brokers who seek to push an agenda in direct defiance of the truth.

So…they’re CNN?

The uproar over Project Veritas can be boiled down to the Left getting a taste of its own medicine, and it’s making them look like the underhanded scumbags they are. That hurts them politically, so they have to do everything possible to discredit Project Veritas, even if the information they’re putting out is inaccurate. Even the “selectively edited” line has been fact-checked into oblivion by Project Veritas putting out the unedited footage. Now, anyone can see the videos in full context.

The thing is the Left doesn’t want to do that because it ruins their narrative, and when it comes down to it, the narrative is all-powerful and must be protected. I’m talking Gollum-with-the-One-Ring-level of protection. As precioussss as that may be to the Left, it’s creepy to me, and it doesn’t square with the facts to anyone else who is paying attention. On the surface, it boggles the mind that an ideological group who insists the truth agrees with them would object to people outside of their group finding the truth for themselves. However, it’s not about the truth, and it never has been. It’s about control.

Like they do with the language, the Left loves to control what is considered to be the truth, and far too often Republicans and conservatives wind up being the victims of these efforts. With Project Veritas, the Left can’t control the narrative as easily on controversial topics, and that scares the Left. Now consider there are other groups starting to emulate what Project Veritas does and throwing open the curtains on what the Left is trying to hide. Just ask Planned Parenthood about how they pay for Lamborghinis.

Yet, as with all people seeking the truth, it’s ultimately up to us to determine their credibility. I would be doing you a disservice if I glossed over the times Project Veritas screwed up or got the facts wrong or tried to frame someone’s words a certain way. You must take the good with the bad and determine whether these folks can be trusted. By and large, I trust Project Veritas, but I always verify, as one of my heroes Ronald Reagan said. The Left doesn’t want you to do any of that. They want you to trust and believe, all to protect a narrative and their own political viability. Anyone who tells the truth will welcome the scrutiny, myself included.

The fact the Left is up in arms over Project Veritas tells you much more than they intend, and it’s not good.

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

124 Views

Over the past week, the Left has brought up the same idea in two different circumstances, one involving their favorite “woke” CNN reporter and the other involving their least favorite investigative reporter. Jim Acosta accosted a female Trump Administration aide when she tried to take a microphone away from him, leading Acosta to deny he even touched her in spite of video footage showing he did. On the other side of the spectrum, James O’Keefe and Project Veritas released videos showing prominent Democrat campaigns doing nefarious and possibly illegal activities.

So, what is the unifying theme? Allegations of doctored footage by the Left. Oh, and dumb allegations of doctored footage.

Whenever the Left brings up doctored footage, you can bet there’s a deeper story, and you can bet I’m going to write about it!

doctored

What the Left thinks it means – video footage that has been edited in such a way as to create a dishonest narrative

What it really means – any video footage the Left can’t bullshit their way out of

As you might expect, Leftists accusing footage of being doctored is loaded with a lot of partisanship. After all, if footage is doctored, it can’t be trustworthy, right? Welll…considering the Left still cheers when Michael Moore comes out with a “documentary,” it’s clear they don’t have a problem with doctored footage when they do it.

The implication of the allegations of doctored footage is that the footage cannot be believed because it has been deceptively edited. That’s what the Left continues to bring up with O’Keefe and Project Veritas because their early videos were edited. That’s right, kids. Leftists think edits made by conservatives are deceptive because…that’s what they do.

However, edits aren’t necessarily dishonest by nature. If you are removing content that has nothing to do with the subject matter or doesn’t fit with the idea you’re trying to convey, it may not be an act of dishonesty, but of necessity. Without edits, documentaries would be hours and hours long, instead of just seeming like they are. (By the way, if you have insomnia, check out any documentary on a sloth’s life, especially if the narrator is Al Gore. You’ll be out in seconds.) And considering documentary directors tend to swing Left, that means their documentaries are dishonest and, thus, can be disregarded.

Unfortunately for the Left, Project Veritas is a step ahead of them because O’Keefe and company has been putting out the full unedited videos of their stings, which makes it harder for the Left to accurately accuse Project Veritas of doctored footage. Oh, they’ll still make the allegations, mind you…

That brings us to Jim Accoster…I mean Acosta. The video footage of his boorish behavior has been slowed down and zoomed in to focus on the actions he took. And, surprise surprise, the Left says the footage is doctored. Of course, they also bring up the fact the footage was provided by InfoWars which is as reliable as Palm Beach County’s vote counting. But in this case, InfoWars got it right. Their footage wasn’t doctored by definition because it wasn’t designed to create a false narrative. It was done to address whether Acosta made contact with the aide, which he did. Of course, the footage also made Acosta, CNN, and all the reporters defending him look like liars and idiots, so…win-win.

When Leftists make the allegation something is doctored, you have to look closer at the footage and try to determine the intent. I’m not going to say there aren’t bad players out there on the Right who would deliberately distort video footage for political purposes, but I would argue there are fewer on the Right than there are on the Left because the latter needs to lie consistently for political benefit. Why else do you think they haven’t done a thing to help gays, blacks, Hispanics, and other groups they claim to represent? Put another way, the Right may lie, but the Left will lie.

And when it comes to video footage and allegations of doctored footage, that distinction makes all the difference.

In the case of Project Veritas, the doctoring allegations fall apart with their transparency. In the case of Jim Acosta, the doctoring allegations fall apart because the footage isn’t deceptively edited. In both cases, it creates an environment where the Left has a vested interest in discrediting the footage: the footage exposes their dishonesty. And the allegations of doctored footage doubles down on it, which should be a major red flag to anyone interested in the truth.

Which is to say, anyone to the right of, say, Nancy Pelosi.

Ronald Reagan had a famous quotation related to the former Soviet Union: “Trust, but verify.” When it comes to Leftist allegations of doctored footage when it makes them look like scumbags, maybe it should be “Verify, then trust.”

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

91 Views

If you were here last week, you saw my award-winning piece on voter/election fraud. (Granted, the award was a No Prize, but still, it’s a prestigious award. And it’s from Italy.) If you weren’t here last week, you missed by award-winning piece on voter/election fraud. This week, I’m going to flip the script a bit and talk about the other side of the equation: voter intimidation.

voter intimidation

What the Left believes it means – Republican efforts to discourage potential Democrat voters from voting

What it really means – Leftists trying to claim to be victims while strong-arming the opposition

Remember the 2000 election? Ah, those were the days to be a political junkie. It was back in those days when Democrats first floated the idea of voter intimidation in Florida. You see, blacks were scared away from voting because…there were barricades! And we have Rev. Jesse Jackson’s word for it, and we can totally trust him! It’s not like he’s lied about anything or done anything immoral, like…oh, I don’t know…having a child out of wedlock.

Since those heady days, the concept of voter intimidation has expanded to the political equivalent of a double whammy. In 2008, members of the New Black Panther Party stationed themselves outside of polling places in Philadelphia as security. And by security, I mean intimidation with clubs. Of course, the Department of Justice under President Obama saw nothing wrong with that (mainly because it worked in his favor), so the matter was dropped.

At least until Republicans could be blamed for it on evidence thinner than a drawing of Kate Moss on paper one micron thick.

After pretending actual voter intimidation against Republicans was a thing, Democrats have seemingly found voter intimidation in everything from voter ID to Donald Trump asking supporters to do what the New Black Panther Party did in 2008. Granted, the latter might be considered intimidation (unless we use the Obama DOJ definition), but the former isn’t threatening at all. On an intimidation scale from a fluffy puppy to Brock Sampson on PCP, voter ID is a lot closer to the puppy.

This begs the question of why the Left is scared of barricades and voter ID. After all, these people are supposed to be super smart and not afraid to get their knuckles bloodied when it comes to fighting the good fight. Yet, they turn into Scooby Doo in the Amityville Horror house at pieces of wood and paper? No wonder they like the French so much. They look like Rambo in comparison.

The barricade intimidation is a bit hard for me to swallow. If you’re frightened off by a barricade, maybe you just aren’t meant to vote for anything more important than Prom King and Queen. Voting, even in the privacy of a polling booth, requires a level of courage most people can muster just by waking up in the morning. Of course, the racist Left wants us to believe these barricades are racist in nature because it only scared off blacks. I’m sorry, but that’s monster-under-your-bed kind of frightening.

Now, the voter ID being intimidating is easy for me to swallow, especially considering the lengths Democrats have gone to turn voter ID into something only slightly more popular than Andrew Dice Clay’s one man show “Hitler, the Misunderstood.” This is by design, of course. If they can demonize voter ID, it not only makes it harder for Republicans to fight for these laws, but it makes it easier for Democrats to circumvent existing laws.

Think about it for a moment. Wouldn’t you be scared out of your wits if laws were put in place that would effectively turn almost every “get out of the vote” effort your party enacts into a crime? Of course you would. The problem is the laws are seen as inconveniences to Leftists until they find a way around them. And as the one-two punch of Wikileaks and Project Veritas has shown us, there are more than a few people in the DNC willing to play as fast and loose with the laws as Bill Clinton likes his interns.

Of course, this won’t cause any handwringing or clutching of pearls with the Left. They believe the ends justify the means, so even if the means are dirtier than Larry Flynt’s porn collection it’s fine if it gets the results they want. That’s one reason the voter intimidation concept doesn’t fly with me. It’s purely a political move designed to make the Democrats’ target audience (potential voters who are dumber than a box of rocks inside a bag of hammers) believe there are Republicans under their beds telling them not to vote. And given the fact these are the same people who thought a half-term Senator and his old white guy sidekick were qualified to be President and Vice-President, they might actually believe that.

But there’s another reason voter intimidation claims don’t work for me. It makes people believe they’re the cowards the Left wants them to be. Most people don’t want to create waves, so they tend to knuckle under to the demands of people they consider to be more informed than they are. This fear of retribution causes a lot of people to accept concepts they wouldn’t normally hold. Just ask anyone who has been chastised by the Left for contradicting them on global warming.

But here’s the thing. Voting requires you to take a stand. There is no “maybe” to a vote; you pick a candidate you support and that’s that. The beauty of our system of government is we can vote in private and no one else needs to know who you voted for. (At least, not until Leftists find a way to track your DNA signature based on fingerprints left on ballots and electronic voting screens, but that’s a long ways off…I hope.) You know who makes you accountable for your vote? You. End of list.

So, don’t believe the hype when it comes to voter intimidation. And make sure you vote. The only wasted vote is one not cast when you’re eligible to cast one.

Well, that, or a vote for Jill Stein.