Hip waders are in full fashion now that the attack ads against Darcy Burner are all over the airwaves. Just on the facts alone, as Daryl at Hominid Views details, the ads are grossly misleading and riddled with falsehoods.
It's predicated on characterizing a Seattle Times story as critical of Burner -- when all it actually does is report the Reichert campaign's claims against her:
- The video cites this 9/24 article and quotes from the article, "Burner's charges hurt by inaccuracies."
The only problem is, that's not what the article says! Nowhere does the article "cry foul" against Darcy. Instead, it reports that the Reichert campaign was "crying foul."
In fact, the author, Jonathan Martin, doesn’t take a stand on who is correct and who is incorrect. What the article does say is, "[a]ds against both candidates contain inaccuracies" and prints pros and cons claimed by both campaigns. The print edition even sports the subtitle, "[c]laims by both sides are open to contention."
The words "charges" and "hurt" don't even appear in the article. You know, as in the quote "Burner's charges hurt by 'inaccuracies,'" a quote that they specifically attribute to the Seattle Times on 9/24/2006. The Seattle Times didn't say any such thing.
In other words, Reichert's ad "misquotes" the Seattle Times by ... umm ... making up new words and constructing a phrase that doesn't appear in the article!
That's your Republican Party: Creating their own make-believe reality.
Too bad it looks like Bizarro World.
Goldy has more.
No comments:
Post a Comment