Astroturfing the “national discussion”
Politico ran an article about a supposedly “non-partisan” organization of hunters called the Bull Moose Sportsmen which commissioned a poll about universal background checks which found that 72% of hunters that were polled supported that measure.
”While we take a conservative view of the Second Amendment, we’re also mothers and fathers. We share the outrage of the atrocities like those in Aurora and Newtown,” [Bull Moose Sportsmen co-director Gaspar] Perricone said. “[Protecting] our children while our Second Amendment [rights] are protected — both can be accomplished.”
Perricone met with President Barack Obama later Wednesday in Denver as part of Obama’s trip to drum up support for gun reform.
I guess the name “Bull Moose” is supposed to conjure images of Republican President Teddy Roosevelt with his elephant gun stalking the African plains. But, Bull Moose Sportsmen is no more non-partisan than VoteVets, discovers Emily Miller at the Washington Times;
In fact, Bull Moose Sportsmen is a fringe organization run by Democratic activists that has been rejected from membership into the major gun and hunting groups’ umbrella organization because it refuses to reveal its funding sources.
The American Wildlife Conservation Partners (AWCP) is a consortium of 42 organizations, including major groups such as Safari Club International, Ducks Unlimited, National Wildlife Turkey Federation, National Rifle Association and the National Shooting Sports Foundation. The groups together represent 6 million individual members.
Members of AWCP tell me that Bull Moose has been denied entry into their organization because it refused to reveal its mysterious funding sources.
The co-founders of the Bull Moose Sportsmen were both staffers of former Colorado Senator Mark Udall, of course, a Democrat. So, how, exactly, are we supposed to have a national discussion about guns, when there is so much deceit as to who is talking. In the Washington Post today, they blame the NRA for derailing gun control with political maneuvers, but if they want someone to blame, they should look at the Democrats and their flood of “information” that the Democrats have inflicted on the “national discussion”.
Category: Gun Grabbing Fascists
Jonn: perhaps it would be a touch more accurate to call the MSM’s misleading and slanted reporting here dezinformatsia (disinformation) rather than “information”.
I would like to see their data on this. If they were on the up and up they would have posted the findings. Then again, being a Democrat run astroturfing group I’m not holding my breath.
Seems to me I remember reading that TR was big on trying to impliment what we would now call socialized medicine,but on gun control, not so much.
So once again, the libtards are redefining the words in order to confuse and control the conversation.
Out them. Every time.
Astroturfing is like fauxtography: easily detected if the right questions get asked.
@3. I recall visiting Sagamore Hill (TR’s home) on Long Island when I was a kid and looking at many of the fruits of his hunting prowess. He was a tough bird, that’s for sure. Aside from the famous charge, he was shot in the chest before delivering a speech and, after the ruckus subsided, gave his speech before going to the doctor. Unlike today’s presidents, he defied labeling. He attended Harvard but was on its boxing team. He was in Columbia law school but quit. He was running the Navy but quit to form the volunteer Roughriders. He was nominated for the MOH and, 100 years later, Bill Clinton signed off on it. He truly was an enigma and would, were he alive today, be doing what he did quite well: kicking ass and taking names.
No different than the lame stream media reporting that X% of NRA members approve of background checks for everyone. When the NRA has never released their membership rolls. One would be forced to believe that the LSM is making shit up as they go along.
OF course they do, UpNorth. They can’t come up with facts, so they create fiction instead.
Not too surprising, considering that the original Bull-Moose Party was billed at the time as the Progressive party.
“… Bull Moose has been denied entry into their organization because it refused to reveal its mysterious funding sources. ”
Geeeez. Another Soros stealth PAC!?
A couple of thoughts on modern psychological operations:
Folks today expect to be told ‘what it (news stories) all means’ without regard to who is paying for the message embedded in the story. The most popular form of journalism is Yellow Journalism – we know it as “Fake But Accurate.” Yellow Journalism is at its highest peak during a Prognazi Pysop offensive.
The original Bull Moose party was a progressive organization that has as its modern descendents the Green Party, No Labels, and the Ron Paul Revolution.
Honest organizations never fear the sunlight.
“Bull Moose”? Bullshit…
That organization doesn’t speak for my interests, and I certainly don’t belong to them.
All someone did was pay $500,000 to get an audience with the President, so naturally they’re getting recognition.
So, the Democrats are running an underground front organization posing as hunters to undermine a Constitutional Right.
Tar and Feathers.
Got the tar melting right now, anybody have some more feathers?
They know they are losing the battle, so they have to create a group, which supports them, that is supposedly part of what they are going after to begin with. They point to this group as an example of the “common sense” side and that not everyone is against their machinations. They have been doing this kind of thing for decades. Just like their “poll numbers” that indicate that X% is in favor of universal background checks, etc. I’m sure someone could dig up a “poll” that was done in 1930’s Germany saying that a vast majority of the population was in favor of gassing the Jews, too.