Mugger fatally shoots baby in stroller--MSM uninterested
At 9am last Thursday morning in the small town of Brunswick, Georgia, a woman put her baby in a stroller and went out for a morning walk. While doing so she says she was accosted by two teenagers--one with a gun--who demanded money.
When she said she didn't have any with her, the attacker threatened to shoot her baby. When she screamed and moved to protect her son, she says the teen started shooting.
One shot grazed her ear, a second hit her in the leg. She tried to shield her baby but the shooter pulled her away and...shot her 13-month-old baby in the face, killing him.
You heard about this on the Thursday evening network news, right? Cuz, you know, it had all the hot buttons for a lead story: gun crime, innocent victim killed. I mean, if much of the horror of the Sandy Hook killings was because many of the victims were seven years old, you'd think the cold-blooded murder of a 13-month-old baby in a stroller would have the networks in full "tragedy" mode, eh?
So if you missed the Thursday evening news, maybe you caught the replay Friday.
No? Wow, that's odd. Why would the national TV networks not give this story even 30 seconds of airtime?
Ah, it's prolly because the nets consider a mass murder like Sandy Hook newsworthy but regard a single killing--even of a baby in a stroller--as merely a local crime, of no national interest.
Yeh, maybe that's it.
But wait...that can't possibly be the reason, because the TV networks made the Trayvon Martin shooting their top story for, geez, seemed like three months at least.
Wait, I got it now: The Martin shooting was national-newsworthy because of the racial angle involved--shooter and victim were of different races. Also the shooter had been *watching* Martin and thought he was behaving suspiciously. Yeah, that must be it.
But wait...Thursday's baby-shooting also involved a killer of one race and victim of another. So seems to me it had all the hot-buttons to be a lead story on all the networks. And can you imagine the extra outrage if Trayvon Martin had been just 13 months old and in a stroller, being pushed by his mom at 9am when he was fatally shot? One shudders to think how high the outrage level would have been.
How...odd...that the national TV nets haven't uttered a peep, eh?
Maybe the gunman didn't really mean to shoot the baby--maybe he was grappling with the mother and his gun went off. Oh wait...according to the AP interview with the mother, she said the assailant said, `Do you want me to kill your baby?' and then walked around to the front of the stroller and shot the baby in the face.
So according to the mother the shooting was intentional.
People, if Travon Martin's death was worth covering, wouldn't you think this murder would be even more newsworthy, and should get at least as much national coverage?
But of course it won't.
And you already know why. Here's the link. But to be candid, it's to a fringe source known for slanting news to stoke the fires of anger, to push policies it supports.
Yes, it's that goofy cable "news" outfit, CNN.
Huffington Post posted an AP story that was *very* circumspect: The headline reads "Teens allegedly kill baby in front of mother." See, the baby's killing has only been *alleged*--I guess the liberals at HuffPo aren't 100% sure that the baby was actually killed. Or if they concede the baby is in fact dead, perhaps they're implying that it didn't happen in front of the mother. Or maybe the mother shot her own baby and is just inventing the part about the teenage shooters as a cover.
Ya gotta love that meticulous interest by the headline writer at HuffPo in not jumping to conclusions on this story.
You may also notice that the AP piece doesn't have a single mention--not a word--about the races of the killer and the victim. Cuz, y'know, that's not important. Unless it's a 17-year-old black teen shot in self-defense by a half-Mexican guy. Then it's *critical* to the story.
Okay, I fully agree that in a big population, every day someone will do something outrageous. I'm also clear on the fact that the alleged shooter in this case is no more a fair representative of blacks than Adam Lanza is of whites. What I'm trying to show here is simply the ghastly, outrageous, extreme liberal bias of the AP and all the liberal-run networks, in that Travon got endless national air- and print coverage, while this far greater outrage will get zero national coverage.
Oh, and since none of the nationals will show this, here's a picture of the 13-month-old murder victim:
When she said she didn't have any with her, the attacker threatened to shoot her baby. When she screamed and moved to protect her son, she says the teen started shooting.
One shot grazed her ear, a second hit her in the leg. She tried to shield her baby but the shooter pulled her away and...shot her 13-month-old baby in the face, killing him.
You heard about this on the Thursday evening network news, right? Cuz, you know, it had all the hot buttons for a lead story: gun crime, innocent victim killed. I mean, if much of the horror of the Sandy Hook killings was because many of the victims were seven years old, you'd think the cold-blooded murder of a 13-month-old baby in a stroller would have the networks in full "tragedy" mode, eh?
So if you missed the Thursday evening news, maybe you caught the replay Friday.
No? Wow, that's odd. Why would the national TV networks not give this story even 30 seconds of airtime?
Ah, it's prolly because the nets consider a mass murder like Sandy Hook newsworthy but regard a single killing--even of a baby in a stroller--as merely a local crime, of no national interest.
Yeh, maybe that's it.
But wait...that can't possibly be the reason, because the TV networks made the Trayvon Martin shooting their top story for, geez, seemed like three months at least.
Wait, I got it now: The Martin shooting was national-newsworthy because of the racial angle involved--shooter and victim were of different races. Also the shooter had been *watching* Martin and thought he was behaving suspiciously. Yeah, that must be it.
But wait...Thursday's baby-shooting also involved a killer of one race and victim of another. So seems to me it had all the hot-buttons to be a lead story on all the networks. And can you imagine the extra outrage if Trayvon Martin had been just 13 months old and in a stroller, being pushed by his mom at 9am when he was fatally shot? One shudders to think how high the outrage level would have been.
How...odd...that the national TV nets haven't uttered a peep, eh?
Maybe the gunman didn't really mean to shoot the baby--maybe he was grappling with the mother and his gun went off. Oh wait...according to the AP interview with the mother, she said the assailant said, `Do you want me to kill your baby?' and then walked around to the front of the stroller and shot the baby in the face.
So according to the mother the shooting was intentional.
People, if Travon Martin's death was worth covering, wouldn't you think this murder would be even more newsworthy, and should get at least as much national coverage?
But of course it won't.
And you already know why. Here's the link. But to be candid, it's to a fringe source known for slanting news to stoke the fires of anger, to push policies it supports.
Yes, it's that goofy cable "news" outfit, CNN.
Huffington Post posted an AP story that was *very* circumspect: The headline reads "Teens allegedly kill baby in front of mother." See, the baby's killing has only been *alleged*--I guess the liberals at HuffPo aren't 100% sure that the baby was actually killed. Or if they concede the baby is in fact dead, perhaps they're implying that it didn't happen in front of the mother. Or maybe the mother shot her own baby and is just inventing the part about the teenage shooters as a cover.
Ya gotta love that meticulous interest by the headline writer at HuffPo in not jumping to conclusions on this story.
You may also notice that the AP piece doesn't have a single mention--not a word--about the races of the killer and the victim. Cuz, y'know, that's not important. Unless it's a 17-year-old black teen shot in self-defense by a half-Mexican guy. Then it's *critical* to the story.
Okay, I fully agree that in a big population, every day someone will do something outrageous. I'm also clear on the fact that the alleged shooter in this case is no more a fair representative of blacks than Adam Lanza is of whites. What I'm trying to show here is simply the ghastly, outrageous, extreme liberal bias of the AP and all the liberal-run networks, in that Travon got endless national air- and print coverage, while this far greater outrage will get zero national coverage.
Oh, and since none of the nationals will show this, here's a picture of the 13-month-old murder victim:
posted by SF at
12:15 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home