Tags: 
Categories: 
When I heard earlier in the day that Howard Stern’s crew had placed a prank call to the law enforcement agencies with officers in harm’s way during a gun battle with cop killer Christopher Dorner, I thought that would HAVE to be the dumbest moment of the day. I like Howard and don’t particularly view him as political, but interfering with communications during a gun battle in which a police officer has been killed and another wounded is a pretty stupid move.
Our “friend” over at MSNBC bailed out Howard Stern by asking a couple of the dumbest on air questions EVER. During the live coverage of the tense mountain stand-off Matthews distinguished himself by asking offensive and racist questions that made it clear that Matthew’s sympathies were with the cop killer and not the police. Talking to Los Angeles Times journalist Andrew Blankstein, Matthews agonized about being fair to Chris Dorner, the man who has allegedly murdered three people and wounded several others: “How do you write a story like this that’s objective for the big metropolitan paper, the Los Angeles Times?” He continued, “Are there people in your newsroom, editors who are saying, ‘We have to be careful here. It’s not simple. This man may have a complaint.’” (Matthews) Matthews implies that “true” reporting would mean that you have to report evenly between law enforcement’s “side” and Dorner’s “side.”
But Matthews did not end his day on this high note, no way. He went on to ask the Mayor of Big Bear Lake “Are there any African-Americans that live there or is it largely a white community, largely?” Really, that is your question? A man has now killed four people including two law enforcement officers, has terrified an entire community for two weeks, has kidnapped three innocent people during his spree and the thing that Chris Matthews wants to know is whether there is diversity in the town where Dorner is cornered? I don’t even know how to reply to that one.
HotAir
I can’t honestly say I have an opinion since at this point it doesn’t matter so much as he’s presumed dead.
The only concern I had was whether or not he received a fair trial instead of being executed via drone strike. Such a development, if allowed to pass unpunished, would have become a perpetual nightmare for those of us fighting for the rights of both ourselves and other Americans.
I agree with you Void. The use of the drones here made me nervous.
So you’re saying these drones were armed with more than surveillance cameras?
He wants to be cuddled by a big strong black man. A real piece of shit in my opinion
OF course the media only sided and sympathized with the COPS, LAPD, Sheriff Dept (racist, biased, anti-everything) that they are – especially with anyone that breaks their ‘code of silence’ / ‘blue code’ which Dorner did in order to uuphold his uniform & position as an officer! As his manifesto mentioned – the LAPD only gets worse with time. Dorner was a HERO for the American people – just as Superman, Batman, Green Arrow… fighting for justice & the American Way!
Sam, so if you get fired and you think it was wrong you should kill as many people as you can so that your firing can be reviewed to see if it was done fairly. That is what you said, and that scares me.
Dorner’s reason for killing is much more complex than his wrongful termination. He is fighting against a system that has failed in its duty to protect and serve the residents of LA County.
Can his reasons justify his actions REGARDLESS of what those reasons are?
Sam, this criminal killed innocent people,kidnapped people, shot people, committed grand theft and you are making him out to be a hero???? To bad one of the victims wasn’t a relative, friend or colleague of yours! You are pathetic! !!!!
If you’re going to slime someone GW, you MIGHT want to try and be accurate.
In your WORLD asking a legitimate question about Dorner’s grievances is “dumb”, forget the fact that the LAPD is getting very little sympathy from the community it serves BECAUSE of grievances like Dorner’s. Matthew’s comments were in relation to that reaction.
And WHY didn’t you mention Matthew’s ACTUAL ending statement?;
MATTHEWS: “And, of course, the conflict here is that even if he was badly, badly handled, his case over the years, you know, unfairly treated, the way he’s reacted shows a man unstable to begin with.”
Joe, this blog was founded on the concept that there are few places on the internet where there is a free flow of ideas and discussion free of personal attacks. You and Snoopy crossed the line some time ago and I have tried to be tolerent and avoid censoring unnecessary personal attacks. I will not start editing your comments to the extent that they become purely personal attacks and not on point with the post.
As to the substance of your comment, asking questions about Dorner’s “grievances” is not stupid, those would be good journalistic questions. Asking that question while the man is killing people and endangering lives is completely innappropriate and wrong. LAPD has reopened Dorner’s case and the eyes of the world are on them. Let’s say for the sake of argument that Dorner was completely correct and that the LAPD fired him as a coverup for some other action – Would that justify him killing four people, shooting half a dozen more, kidnapping three innocent people, stealing cars and all of the other acts that Dorner has done?
You really should pull out your dictionary…or law dictionary…before making false and offensive accusations of racism. I posit that it is YOU who is the racist as even the mention of race illicited a cry of racism from you. Nothing in Mr. Matthews’ question indicated he thought one race superior over another or showed any stereotyping of any race.
And the censoring begins.
GW, you can cut and paste, edit, ignore, leave out, re-arrange and omit any and all facts that don’t fit your pre-concieved opinions, but that is exactly what a propagandist does.
If you don’t like the title then don’t fit the description.
Wikipedia (emphasis mine);
“The propagandist seeks to change the way people understand an issue or situation for the purpose of changing their actions and expectations in ways that are desirable to the interest group. Propaganda, in this sense, serves as a corollary to CENSORSHIP in which the same purpose is achieved, not by filling people’s minds with approved information, but by preventing people from being confronted with opposing points of view. What sets propaganda apart from other forms of advocacy is the willingness of the propagandist to change people’s understanding through DECEPTION and CONFUSION rather than persuasion and understanding. The leaders of an organization know the information to be ONE-SIDED or UNTRUE, but this may not be true for the rank and file members who help to disseminate the propaganda.”
Yes, joe. It appears my posts will also be awaiting moderation as well. Many of my comments were removed and edited (censored). Even a reply to a personal attack on me of simply “Yawn…”. It was surely on topic and a valid reply to a personal attack…but not to the author of this blog apparently. Of course the personal attack on me remains.
Joe, I appreciate the definition. I will pass it on to MSNBC where it might actually be helpful. Thanks
No need to forward to Fox Nation, of course. It’s already enshrined in their Mission Statement, By-Laws and Contracts.
No, and that was NOT what Matthew’s was saying either. See his last statement. The “timing” is appropriate, the LAPD carelessly opened fire on three innocent people in their frenzied manhunt. The community is reacting to the LAPD now, people are as afraid of the cops as they are of Dorner, that makes his question relevant and timely.
You purposely mischaracterize Matthew’s statement and then you erroneously(?) put his opening statement as his “ending” comment when it wasn’t and you completely ignore (edited?) Matthew’s calling Dorner “unstable”.
I’ve showed where YOU were WRONG, please point to anything I’ve said that isn’t true.
Dear Mr. Willis,
What a shame you have taken the decision to censor my comments. As predicted, the more uncomfortable the truth presented, the quicker it seems it will now be censored. A sad day, indeed…for the left leaning posters. The right leaning posters…nothing to worry about. The personal attacks are apparently welcome and even encouraged.
I’ll reiterate (one) censored portion of my previous comment. What evidence elicited a paranoid stance that the drones were armed with bombs or that there was any intention of killing this citizen by the LOCAL authorities by drone?
As joe pointed out, the highly selective citation of one or two of Mr. Matthews’ entire interview is disingenuous at best…vitriolic at worse.
As an aside, are we “allowed” to reply to those who attack the posters such as myself? I see you removed a couple benign replies to those who personally attacked me. What’s the ruling on that?
What an Idiot! The media goes after every angle to make a mole hill into a mountain. One reporter can and will find some angle to raise controversy knowing good and well it will blow over as soon as its reported. So why not? while he was at it he should have asked if he was wearing Black or White shoes? That way he would have covered it from top to bottom. They should put his Butt in jail just for grins and as soon as another reporter says something lock him up also. If they do it enough maybe they (the Media) will stop doing stupid things. Oh and also NO reporters over the age of 45, politicians included.