The Associated Press' New Standard: Andrew Breitbart Must Prove Tea Party is Not Racist

If there was ever any doubt about the partisan leanings of The Democrat Party Controlled State-Run Associated Press, that doubt took a flying leap out the window yesterday in this piece provided by "journalist" Michael R. Blood.

Paid to offer a factual account, yet clearly working for the Obama agenda as well as documenting his opinion of the events that transpired yesterday at the Tea Party Express rally in Searchlight, Nevada, Mr. Blood began his piece rather fairly and accurately.

The wind whipped U.S. flags behind the former Alaska governor as she stood on a makeshift stage, holding a microphone and her notes and speaking to a cheering crowd. She told them Reid, fighting for re-election, is "gambling away our future."

"Someone needs to tell him, this is not a crapshoot," Palin said.

Even Mr. Blood couldn't equal the blatant misrepresentation of CNN's Fredericka Whitfield, who claimed that there were "Hundreds, if not dozens of people" in attendance at the rally, as he estimated the crowd at about 7000. (For the record, Politico reported nearly 20,000 in attendance).

He continued his account by noting that Senator Dingy Harry is trailing in the polls, stating:

A string of polls has shown Reid is vulnerable in politically moderate Nevada after pushing Obama's agenda in Congress. His standing has also been hurt by Nevada's double-digit unemployment and record foreclosure and bankruptcy rates.

Of course, the Statist Mr. Blood couldn't resist offering Dingy Harry's sarcastic jab at the Tea Party Patriots, as he offered:

The Searchlight native responded with sarcasm to the large crowd gathered in the hardscrabble town of about 1,000 he grew up in.

"I'm happy so many people came to see my hometown of Searchlight and spend their out-of-state money, especially in these tough economic times," Reid said Saturday in a statement released through his Senate campaign. "This election will be decided by Nevadans, not people from other states who parachuted in for one day to have a tea party."

However, the next bit of "work" by Mr. Blood proved exactly where his political heart lies, as he stated:

It's been called a conservative Woodstock, and takes place just days after the historic health care vote that ushered in near-universal medical coverage and divided Congress and the nation. The vote was followed by reports of threats and vandalism aimed at some Washington lawmakers, mostly Democrats who supported the new law.

Conservative columnist Andrew Breitbart disputed accounts that tea party activists in Washington shouted racial epithets at black members of Congress amid the health care debate, although he didn't provide any evidence.

"I know you're not a racist group," he told the crowd.

In two paragraphs, Mr. Blood managed to both completely de-legitimize his own credentials, as well as prove that her, like the majority of American media, are working in favor of the Obama agenda.

Unless someone can prove to me otherwise, the burden of proof remains on the Congressional representatives to prove the use of racial epithets by any members of the crowd on the Capitol lawn last Sunday.

Writing for Big Journalism, Larry O'Connor rightly offers:

Now, on to the assault on basic fairness: Is the AP now on record that the Tea Party activists who protest at these gatherings are ipso facto guilty of racism if someone accuses them of racism? Is that all it takes? Have there been any calls from the AP for members of the Congressional Black Caucus to prove that the protesters that day shouted the N-word? Just yesterday, the AP referred to Ft. Hood terrorist Malik Nadal Hasan as a “suspect.” Apparently, Hasan is afforded the right to be innocent until proven guilty, but tea party protesters are not.

There were upward of 30,000 in attendance that day from all political leanings, as well as many major media outlets, yet somehow over the course of one full week nobody has been able to produce evidence that and slurs were used.

As O'Connor continues:

There are multiple videos of the CBC’s march down the middle of the tea party protest last Sunday. You can see on the videos that many people are holding flip cameras in their hands. These days, just about anyone with a cell phone has the capability of capturing events on video. And yet, here we are, one week later, and not one person has produced a video showing anyone saying the N-word. Not one.

Isn’t it obvious that for someone to fan the flames of racial politics as members of the CBC did last week, the burden of proof should be on them? And, isn’t it a lot easier to prove that someone did use the N-word versus proving someone did not?

In fact, for Breitbart to meet the AP’s standard, he would have to provide hours and hours of video from every angle of the protest to prove that the N-word was not used. And even then, nut jobs at left-wing “watchdog” groups will claim that the tapes he provided were “heavily edited.”

A final thought - Andrew Breitbart had previously offered $10,000 of his own money to anyone who could provide evidence that the "N-word" had been used during last Sunday's Congressional walk to the Capitol Building. Breitbart has now upped the stakes to $100K.

I sincerely doubt that The Associated Press will make any effort to investigate and seek the truth, because it does not fit the Obama agenda.