More errors in Media Matters
It is actually pretty amazing that anyone takes this place seriously. Here is another piece at Media Matters filled with errors:
The personal attacks on me are really hard to believe that anyone would take seriously. The paper that is being referred to is one that I helped on, but it was published by Florenz Plassmann and John Whitley. As those two individuals have explained their paper main results using count estimates were not altered by the very small errors. The only results impacted were the results that they showed were strongly biased against finding anything.
For some reason I suspect that Media Matters will continue not posting my comments up on their websites. What is Media Matters afraid of? Why do they have to continually censor responses from those that they criticize?
For the record, Loughner was subdued when he eventually had to stop to re-load after firing 31 shots.In fact, the killer’s gun jammed precisely because he used such a large capacity magazine (From the WSJ: "In the seconds that followed, say authorities, Mr. Loughner shot 18 others, six fatally, including the judge and a 9-year-old girl, before his gun jammed and he was wrestled to the ground."). The long spring used in this high capacity magazines simply didn’t have enough force to properly push the last couple of bullets into the gun. Given that it can take just a couple of seconds to replace a magazine, the killer would have likely been able to fire more rounds if he had brought several smaller magazines.
The personal attacks on me are really hard to believe that anyone would take seriously. The paper that is being referred to is one that I helped on, but it was published by Florenz Plassmann and John Whitley. As those two individuals have explained their paper main results using count estimates were not altered by the very small errors. The only results impacted were the results that they showed were strongly biased against finding anything.
For some reason I suspect that Media Matters will continue not posting my comments up on their websites. What is Media Matters afraid of? Why do they have to continually censor responses from those that they criticize?
Labels: magazine jammed, mediabias, mediamatters
posted by John Lott at 6:54 PM
1 Comments:
The Left makes charges, and repeats those false charges, without regard to any truth, except revolutionary-truth.
Listening to the Left is like taking seriously the charges from a bitter spouse in the midst of a divorce. It's more important for the Left to fill the record with the words of false charges than it is to convince anyone. In this day of Google 30 kooks talking about Sarah Palin being from Mars and having obvioulsy blue skin is as important as a cover story from Time, or 60 minutes.
The point of the false charge is to tell the Left "this event is just like the other events, so your assumptions are confirmed. Please fill in your own details."
It is important to get an accurate debunking of the Leftist meme on the record, but it's also important to speak directly about these Leftist efforts and groups and not indirectly and politely about them. It's important for conservatives and other interested in the truth to call these sources and groups as a conspiracy of Leftists willing to lie cheat and steal to win.
When we speak politely or only ask why people might take theses groups seriously, we don't connect the dots for those not involved in the event and they will assume the truth is somewhere between "conservatives are puppy-smashing monsters" and "conservatives are not puppy-smashing monsters."
We have to emphasize these groups will call innocent people guilty and they will manufacture quotes and lies. In fact they make a living of this at the Ny Times and the TV networks.
Post a Comment
<< Home