As noted in the previous post, it’s unethical to use Stacey Abram’s crummy romance novels against her, when she herself is such a revoltingly unethical public figure. The Democrats and the news media have been trying to make a hero out of Abrams, who pretty clearly is a fake and an opportunist whose ethics alarms rusted shut long ago. Most recently, she pushed Major League Baseball to pull the All-Star Game from Atlanta because of the “Jim Crow” election law changes in Georgia Joe Biden repeatedly lied about. MLB, desperately pandering, relocated the game to Colorado, a state whose safe-guards against voting fraud are more stringent than Georgia’s. (Trying to make voting less easy to rig is “racist.” Yeah, I don’t get it either.)
After MLB followed Abrams’ exhortations and it was revealed that the move would devastate small businesses in Atlanta, many of them minority-owned, Abrams said she was “disappointed” in baseball.
Yes, she is a weasel in human form. The fun part is figuring out how long before enough people figure it out. The mainstream news media, which resembles Pravda more with each passing day, is doing its best to delay that moment of reckoning, as the recent revelation about her stealth-edited USA Today essay illustrates.
The piece was published on March 31, right before Major League Baseball made the despicable choice to withdraw from Georgia the law that Abrams opposed. Abrams then argued that the boycott was a correct corporate response. Abrams was also arguing both sides of the argument at once, something she does a lot, shameless phony that she is. She wrote in part:
“Boycotts work…The impassioned response to the racist, classist bill that is now the law of Georgia is to boycott in order to achieve change. Events hosted by major league baseball, world class soccer, college sports and dozens of Hollywood films hang in the balance. At the same time, activists urge Georgians to swear off of hometown products to express our outrage. Until we hear clear, unequivocal statements that show Georgia-based companies get what’s at stake, I can’t argue with an individual’s choice to opt for their competition. However one lesson of boycotts is that the pain of deprivation must be shared to be sustainable. Otherwise, those least resilient bear the brunt of these actions; and in the aftermath, they struggle to access the victory. And boycotts are complicated affairs that require a long-term commitment to action. I have no doubt that voters of color, particularly Black voters, are willing to endure the hardships of boycotts. But I don’t think that’s necessary — yet. … I ask you to bring your business to Georgia and, if you’re already here, stay and fight. Stay and vote.”
Got that? She can’t argue with a boycott, but wants businesses to come to Georgia. Meanwhile, we know, she was in contact with MLB urging it to pull the All-Star Game. Then came the backlash, so USA Today allowed Abrams to “stealth edit” what she had written, while the piece maintained the same date. Now the section above reads:
“Boycotts work — when the target risks losing something highly valued and the pain becomes unbearable…The impassioned (and understandable) response to the racist, classist bill that is now the law of Georgia is to boycott in order to achieve change. Events that can bring millions of dollars to struggling families hang in the balance. Major League Baseball pulled both its All-Star Game and its draft from Georgia, which could cost our state nearly $100 million in lost revenue. Rather than accept responsibility for their craven actions, Republican leaders blame me and others who have championed voting rights (and actually read the bill). Their faux outrage is designed to hide the fact that they prioritized making it harder for people of color to vote over the economic well-being of all Georgians. To add to the injury, the failed former president is now calling for cancellation of baseball as the national pastime. Boycotts invariably also cost jobs. To be sustainable, the pain of deprivation must be shared rather than borne by those who are least resilient. They also require a long-term commitment to action. The North Carolina boycott of 2016 didn’t stop with the election of Democrat Roy Cooper, and the venerable Montgomery Bus Boycott lasted 381 days, ending only with a Supreme Court decision….Instead of a boycott, I strongly urge other events and productions to do business in Georgia and speak out against our law and similar proposals in other states.”
In John Kerry-speak, Abrams was for a boycott before she was against it.
When Senator Tom Cotton correctly wrote that Abrams had written that “boycotts work” and that she had urged the MLB to boycott Georgia, the news media’s fact-checkers rushed to defend her, using the altered version of her op-ed. In its typical fake factcheck manner, PolitiFact “checked” Cotton by falsely claiming that Abrams had said in the March 31 op-ed that “boycotts invariably also cost jobs. To be sustainable, the pain of deprivation must be shared rather than borne by those who are least resilient. They also require a long-term commitment to action.”
No, that’s what she edited her piece to say after the MLB All-Star Game move blew up in baseball’s smug and incompetent face, and Gannett, USA Today’s publisher, allowed Abrams to blur her language post-publication so she could avoid accountability for costing her state so much business. Twitter, meanwhile, again proving that it is cyber-evil, told users this week: “Stacey Abrams encouraged Americans to invest in Georgia-based businesses after new voter laws were passed, according to journalists and fact-checkers.”
Lies. Abram’s trick was exposed, and her accomplice, Gannett, was forced to admit it, though its apology last week was also deceptive. “We regret the oversight in updating the Stacey Abrams column,” said a spokesperson for Gannett, “As soon as we recognized there was no editor’s note, we added it to the page to reflect her changes. We have reviewed our procedures to ensure this does not occur again.”
Right. Who believes that? “As soon we were caught” is what the apology should read. My sadly deranged progressive zombie friends who maintain that there is no mainstream media bias will, as usual, argue that this was just an honest mistake. But like the parable of the cashier who always makes the wrong change, that claim is not credible when the “honest mistake” somehow always benefits the same groups and individuals.
Add the false narrative that Stacey Abrams was against boycotts to so many others that the news media has built and maintained as they try to fool the public into trusting the untrustworthy.
Source: Washington Examiner
5 thoughts on “Meanwhile, The News Media Keeps Lying For Stacey Abrams”
Maybe I’m just tired but I can make neither hide nor hair of either of Ms. Abrams’ paragraphs. Gibberish.
You aren’t supposed to understand them. They are lofty platitudes that sound nice until you think about them and realize, “hey, that makes no sense.” It’s very similar to what Ocasio-Cortez said about being a product of Planned Parenthood’s supposed healthcare initiatives. Most thought, “well, cool . . .” Now, when you think about it, there is only one way to check and that is to ask her parents if Planned Parenthood actually provided them with neonatal care. Who is going to do that?
Aren’t most (all?) “products of Planned Parenthood” dead children?
That photo tho!!
Yeah, I had to use that one again. I just think Abrams isn’t very bright.