February 03, 2011
— Ace I think it should be called "ABCNews or Something." The "or Something" is the main component.
This is actually teased for PrimeTime live, which is I guess a magazine show ostensibly part of their news division.
They set up a fake sting in Arizona to see if a bad actor can convince a restaurant to aid him in trying to deport other bad actors for "looking Mexican."
They were hoping to catch Whitey engaging in racial profiling.
What actually happens is that a woman accuses the fake cop of racial profiling but then suggests she can help them get away in their car. She is lauded for her progressive views on illegal immigration.
But, um, didn't she just racially profile herself? Her belief was that they were illegals; she didn't dispute that. She just agreed to help them continue evading the law.
And that, for ABCNews or Something, Is laudatory.
Now, if this had gone the other way, of course, Whitey would have been evil. Evil, I guess, for racially profiling but then acting in comportment with the law. Whitey who engages in racially profiling but then helps criminals break the law is good.
Either way, it's stupid: No one's being deported "just based on how they look." The fact is we have tens of millions of illegal immigrants, most from south of the border, and a high percentage from Mexico. This isn't racial profiling so much as it is reality profiling, which is always a controversial technique to a liberal.
Posted by: Ace at
08:39 AM
| Comments (79)
Post contains 268 words, total size 2 kb.
Posted by: Jean at February 03, 2011 08:44 AM (WkuV6)
This John Quinones crap with his "What Would You Do?" was interesting when it started, but they've run out of stuff and now it's just stupid.
Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry at February 03, 2011 08:45 AM (f9c2L)
Posted by: Nighthawk at February 03, 2011 08:45 AM (RSqz2)
Posted by: Clutch Cargo at February 03, 2011 08:46 AM (p+mzQ)
Posted by: ParanoidThursdayInSeattle at February 03, 2011 08:46 AM (RZ8pf)
Posted by: Nighthawk at February 03, 2011 08:46 AM (RSqz2)
Posted by: 18-1 at February 03, 2011 08:47 AM (7BU4a)
Posted by: Charlie Gibson at February 03, 2011 08:47 AM (7BU4a)
Posted by: jeannie at February 03, 2011 08:48 AM (GdalM)
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo (NJConservative) at February 03, 2011 08:50 AM (LH6ir)
That said, the easiest way to detect Americans and possible illegals is through language, which is one of the deepest parts of ones personality. People who don't speak English as their mother tongue are clearly most likely to not be American. Sure, naturalized Americans fall into this category, but it's clear from their non-native English that they most likely weren't raised in America. This is why immigrants of old used to be embarrassed by their accents or broken English and proud that their kids spoke like Americans. But, even given this common sense method of superficial identification, leftists get all up in arms if language is used to measure anything.
All of recorded history and common sense that covers the whole world means nothing to the left. In fact, they work to try and deny it all.
Posted by: iknowtheleft at February 03, 2011 08:52 AM (N49h9)
When the Democrats sort of fell apart in 2002-5 the MSM became the real opposition party. It forced the Democrats back to leftwing basics, and gave them a platform.
Posted by: 18-1 at February 03, 2011 08:52 AM (7BU4a)
Political correctness is killing this nation.
Posted by: Soona at February 03, 2011 08:52 AM (N2GVy)
Posted by: Tigtog at February 03, 2011 08:55 AM (Q5+Og)
Posted by: yarrrr at February 03, 2011 08:56 AM (FXqrA)
It's a television show, Ace. Viewers are supposed to feel gratified in some way for having watched it.
"People are racist. I saw it on that news show. But I'm not. I would've done the right thing. Thank you, ABCNews, for reaffirming that I'm a good person."
Or something.
Posted by: FireHorse at February 03, 2011 08:56 AM (sWynj)
6 We will win only when we stop being afraid of the word "profiling".
Better yet, how about we stop being afraid of the word "prejudiced"? If someone takes the trouble to dress up as a gangbanger, they shouldn't be surprised to be treated like one. And if someone is obviously lying to me, it's not my problem to prove that they are. It's their problem to prove that they aren't.
Posted by: Cautiously Pessimistic at February 03, 2011 08:57 AM (pZEar)
Posted by: Drew in MO at February 03, 2011 08:58 AM (ltqwL)
Remember that when they are reporting on some conservative they want you to hate and trying to push their own favorite candidate.
Posted by: Vic at February 03, 2011 08:59 AM (M9Ie6)
Posted by: Vic at February 03, 2011 09:00 AM (M9Ie6)
Posted by: joeindc44 at February 03, 2011 09:00 AM (QxSug)
Did you know that you can have TV shows and movies streamed instantly to your TV from Netflix? I didn't.
I bought a Streaming DVD player a few months ago and I haven't watched even 15 minutes of "Television" since. Don't miss it a bit.
The easiest way to shut these fools up is "Just Don't Watch" - and obviously don't write a bunch of posts complaining about them - that just emboldens them as they figure you must be watching.
Posted by: Oh, Hi Mark at February 03, 2011 09:02 AM (pk7FG)
Posted by: Soona at February 03, 2011 09:03 AM (N2GVy)
Posted by: Annabelle at February 03, 2011 09:04 AM (4kxCX)
Oh, and under Arizona law, the Security Guard did NOT have any legal reason to ask for ID... no probable cause, and it was not during any other type of law enforcement stop.
Police, cannot do this... a private security Guard?? Lawsuit city.
Thus, the whole story is a misrepresentation of the Law.
Posted by: Romeo13 at February 03, 2011 09:05 AM (AdK6a)
So trying to get average people to support someone in uniform doing something that is against the law, and failing, proves exactly what again?
I think it proves that Assholes Broadcasting Crap needs to brush up on their "DNC Notes" version of Goebbel's "Agitprop 101". Or ask Barky for a reference to a good consultant - someone who just left his staff perhaps.
Posted by: sherlock at February 03, 2011 09:07 AM (2DD2m)
WASHINGTON – House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan (WI-01) today announced spending limits for the remainder of the current fiscal year, a significant step forward to cut government spending and help spur economic growth and job creation. The measure will bring non-security discretionary spending back to pre-stimulus, pre-bailout levels, as House Republicans called for in their Pledge to America. For the remainder of the current fiscal year, the measure will save $74 billion relative to President Obama’s budget request.
Posted by: Miss'80sBaby at February 03, 2011 09:08 AM (sZ+lP)
It is propaganda for a worldview, and it is quite good. I mean, how good is our propaganda when some 20-25% of the population believes the MBM slants right?
Posted by: Jimmuy at February 03, 2011 09:09 AM (8RfPc)
Remember, they gave a 1/2 hour to Lord and King to promote his health care and refused to allow any groups opposed to even BUY their own airtime?
Posted by: Jimmuy at February 03, 2011 09:13 AM (8RfPc)
There was a former "conservative" blogger I used to read that actually claimed in a post that the only reason we were so against illegal immigration is that they were brown skinned and didn't speak english.
My head toady and dicklicker Killgore has conclusively proved that you wingnuts are all racists by posting racist comments on HotAir in the middle of the night. So shut up. And check out my fine selection of trousers and bike seat photos on your way out.
Posted by: A Former "Conservative" Blogger at February 03, 2011 09:16 AM (QKKT0)
East German TV and radio . Their propaganda messages infiltrated all of the programming, including 3-hour boring dramas about life and love, etc
our MFM is essentially the same
Posted by: SantaRosaStan at February 03, 2011 09:19 AM (UqKQV)
Posted by: Jimmuy
-------
I watch Robin Meade in the morning with the sound off all the time. What's unusual about that???
Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry at February 03, 2011 09:23 AM (f9c2L)
AnkleBitingPundits? I recall him being something of a squish on immigration.
Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at February 03, 2011 09:24 AM (TpXEI)
Posted by: cali grump at February 03, 2011 09:26 AM (hL0k8)
Posted by: fb at February 03, 2011 09:28 AM (G60Nl)
Posted by: huerfano at February 03, 2011 09:29 AM (QgmBR)
Posted by: Captain Hate at February 03, 2011 09:33 AM (eh+ki)
You just went right over the producers heads with that sharp, actually just blunt, display of logic.
Posted by: dogfish at February 03, 2011 09:35 AM (NuPNl)
Posted by: Northernlurker at February 03, 2011 09:41 AM (PX1hH)
Posted by: toby928™ at February 03, 2011 09:48 AM (GTbGH)
Posted by: Dateline NBC at February 03, 2011 09:53 AM (2rOwc)
Posted by: huerfano at February 03, 2011 09:57 AM (QgmBR)
Posted by: Meg Mass at February 03, 2011 09:59 AM (f4Ndo)
Posted by: Meg Mass at February 03, 2011 01:59 PM (f4Ndo)
"Celebrate"? I don't think that word means what he thinks it means.
Posted by: AmishDude at February 03, 2011 10:01 AM (BvBKY)
You know what bothers me? Why don't we generally know the name of the first American slave?
Wouldn't that be important to the Black History Month people?
His name was John Casor. I mean, wouldn't this be an important person's name to know what with the legacy of slavery and all?
Posted by: AmishDude at February 03, 2011 10:03 AM (BvBKY)
The producers David E. Kelley says the show (paraphrased) is about "the disparity of wealth in this country between the haves and the have nots". Last week there was a lecture about all the rotten people (60%) who don't like "healthcare".
Posted by: The Mega Indepedent at February 03, 2011 10:06 AM (tQs/i)
The producers David E. Kelley says the show (paraphrased) is about "the disparity of wealth in this country between the haves and the have nots".
Funny thing: lawyers seem to get pretty rich off of advocating for the have nots.
Posted by: AmishDude at February 03, 2011 10:08 AM (BvBKY)
Prime Time Live is still on?
I remember when SNL (Jon Lovitz playing Sam Donaldson) made fun of it when it first appeared in the '80s.
Posted by: logprof (not banned at work . . . yet) at February 03, 2011 10:11 AM (A+6fk)
Posted by: Captain Hate at February 03, 2011 10:12 AM (eh+ki)
Posted by: The Mega Indepedent at February 03, 2011 02:06 PM (tQs/i)
David Kelley and Kathy Bates don't seem to be so hot to give away much of their money. They could live well on $100,000/year and give the rest (and all of their wealth) to some of the little people. But they would never even think to give a modest amount of charity, let alone serious stripping themselves of their wealth (which they could make back in a second, anyway). Selfish liberals project and assume that everyone else is as selfish and self-absorbed as they are.
Liberals only give charity when there's a camera recording it. They think that singing "We Are The World" (which was a crappy song, anyway) constitutes some sort of charitable action - they're giving their time and talent ... LOL.
This is why the left are nothing but despicable, lying scumbags who set out to destroy any society unlucky enough to be burdened with their existence.
Posted by: iknowtheleft at February 03, 2011 10:13 AM (N49h9)
Posted by: toby928™: Free nickless the still-banned (99.174.64.43) at February 03, 2011 10:13 AM (GTbGH)
Posted by: d at February 03, 2011 10:14 AM (aZ+RT)
Liberals only give charity when there's a camera recording it. They think that singing "We Are The World" (which was a crappy song, anyway) constitutes some sort of charitable action - they're giving their time and talent ... LOL.
I think Weird Al skewered that (albeit years later) with "Don't Download This Song"
Posted by: AmishDude at February 03, 2011 10:15 AM (BvBKY)
You know what bothers me? Why don't we generally know the name of the first American slave?
You talking about imported black slaves, or what?
Posted by: HH at February 03, 2011 10:16 AM (6oDXl)
"The idea was to let loose some Middle Eastern-looking people dressed up like Arabs at a race, then secretly film as the bigoted gap-toothed Neanderthals MSM elitists regard normal Americans to be act rudely toward them."
--Why not dress someone in a Palin 2012 T shirt and send him to Berkeley? Too dangerous?
Posted by: logprof (not banned at work . . . yet) at February 03, 2011 10:18 AM (A+6fk)
A couple of threads ago we were talking about rounding up journalists.
Good idea. Rather than saying 57 ABC journalists took part in this TV expose' we'll say *100 ABC journalists produced this sizzling expose'.
*(nice rounded up number of journalists)
Posted by: ABC Noos at February 03, 2011 10:18 AM (J74Py)
You know what bothers me? Why don't we generally know the name of the first American slave?
His name was Toby 100.
Posted by: ABC Noos at February 03, 2011 10:20 AM (J74Py)
You talking about imported black slaves, or what?
Posted by: HH at February 03, 2011 02:16 PM (6oDXl)
The first person in the colonies to be legally considered to be the permanent personal property of another person. There was indentured servitude, but that expired after a few years.
Posted by: AmishDude at February 03, 2011 10:25 AM (BvBKY)
You talking about imported black slaves, or what?
Posted by: HH at February 03, 2011 02:16 PM (6oDXl)
The first person in the colonies to be legally considered to be the permanent personal property of another person. There was indentured servitude, but that expired after a few years.
Posted by: AmishDude at February 03, 2011 02:25 PM (BvBKY)
--Couldn't the Spanish colonists in Florida or New Mexico have owned slaves before 1619?
Posted by: logprof (not banned at work . . . yet) at February 03, 2011 10:27 AM (A+6fk)
The first person in the colonies to be legally considered to be the permanent personal property of another person.
So he was white? I'm not sure I get your point.
Posted by: HH at February 03, 2011 10:35 AM (6oDXl)
So he was white? I'm not sure I get your point.
Posted by: HH at February 03, 2011 02:35 PM (6oDXl)
No he was black, but a free black owned him.
Posted by: Vic at February 03, 2011 10:38 AM (M9Ie6)
Posted by: Running Hobo at February 03, 2011 10:44 AM (l1oyw)
OMG!!!
The first known black slave was owned by a Free Black???
You're shitting me...
Posted by: HH at February 03, 2011 02:44 PM (6oDXl)
--Sssshhhhh, don't tell anyone, but most black murder victims are killed by other Blacks.
Posted by: logprof (not banned at work . . . yet) at February 03, 2011 10:46 AM (A+6fk)
So I'm guessing that the first slaves' name is known, but somehow his owner isn't quite recognized during Black History Month.
That about right?
Posted by: HH at February 03, 2011 10:51 AM (6oDXl)
Not the first slave, but the first one ruled as a "permanent slave".
Posted by: Vic at February 03, 2011 10:55 AM (M9Ie6)
So I'm guessing that the first slaves' name is known, but somehow his owner isn't quite recognized during Black History Month.
That about right?
Posted by: HH at February 03, 2011 02:51 PM (6oDXl)
Neither of them is mentioned much. The owner was Anthony Johnson. He was brought to Virginia via the slave trade but there was no slavery in Virginia so he was an indentured servant. Johnson got his freedom, started his own farm and brought his own indentured servant, Casor.
When Casor wanted to be free after a few years to work for a white farmer, arguing that his indenture was up, Johnson said no and argued in court that Virginia had no right to tell Johnson, an Angolan, that he couldn't have a slave because slavery was part of his cultural heritage. (I'm strongly paraphrasing here.) The court agreed and Virginia had its first slave.
Posted by: AmishDude at February 03, 2011 10:55 AM (BvBKY)
Posted by: Vic at February 03, 2011 02:55 PM (M9Ie6)
Yes. Indentured servants were sometimes brought by the slave trade and were sometimes Europeans who used it to pay for passage to the new world.
There is a real gulf between temporary "slavery" and permanent slavery, though. One, your children were free and two, you weren't likely to be abused because in a few years, you'd be a free person.
Posted by: AmishDude at February 03, 2011 10:58 AM (BvBKY)
But still...The first real, or perpetual slave in the Colonies, was owned by a black man?
Guys...
I don't have the words.
Posted by: HH at February 03, 2011 11:01 AM (6oDXl)
If ABC doesn't run made up stories to promote the liberal agenda, who will? Oh yeah, all the rest of the MFM
Posted by: TheQuietMan at February 03, 2011 11:29 AM (1Jaio)
I like legal drama TV shows most of the time. It's sad that several of those that had the potential to be among the best were bastardized by their producers so as to produce left wing propaganda again and again. As a conservative you find yourself dreading the moment in the show when the characters devolve into liberal hacks. I had to give up The Practice and Boston Legal as two examples because I could not stand having the most sophmoric liberal talking points hammered at me, episode after episode.
I was going to try Harry's Law, but after hearing the reviews here and elsewhere, I refuse to even go there.
Posted by: RM at February 03, 2011 01:21 PM (1kwr2)
Posted by: Meg Mass at February 03, 2011 04:41 PM (f4Ndo)
Hide Comments | Add Comment | Refresh | Top
64 queries taking 0.1668 seconds, 207 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.








Posted by: Truman North at February 03, 2011 08:43 AM (G5JPI)