When on the net readers see headlines like that Scribe wonders just what Newbusters stands for. Is it people who are just “slandering” poor “defenseless” Newsbusters, “slandering” by claiming they “cherry pick” quotes from The Stephanie Miller Show? People who just don’t believe…
NEWBUSTERS SUPPORTS FEEDING DOG POO TO POOR CHILDREN CHRISTMAS DAY
…in freedom of speech? Or is it these people care about honesty in media and are outraged by those who label themselves with the title “news” and publish anything but “news?” Or…
NEWSBUSTERS KILLS PUPPIES AND THEN FEEDS THEM TO RAVENOUS COCKROACHES
…could it be Newsbusters simply pays attention to what serves some highly partisan agenda? Even if it happened the opposite of how they claimed it happened? Are they pulling what’s convenient out of context, like they claim the Left always does? Even intentionally missing the satire, the “mock” in the mocking, and the parody, because creating noise is more important to them, and falsely framing what a writer is ACTUALLY saying their real goal? “Inquiring minds want to…”
NEWSBUSTERS SUPPORTS FORCED INOCULATION OF THE AIDS VIRUS TO BLACK BABIES
…know” what part of this little humor with a point rant Newsbusters would actually report on, since they rarely seem to pay attention to anything except what helps them pump up some artificial, fake, outrage they wish to pass on to their readers.
Scribe thinks he knows which part they’d publish.
Could you flesh this out a little with either links or an explanation? I am not familiar with Newsbusters and possibly don’t want to be.
Newsbusters is a right wing propaganda source that poses as a legitimate location to find news, even more so than FOX. They make The Globe look almost legit. A good portion of the talking points you hear spouted from right wings folks come from Newsbusters. I think Scribe was trying to see if they’d pick up on any of the headlines minus the context, but I’m not going to give them the “click” to find out.