[Emoticon]

Well Rolling Stone finally just retracted their "rape culture" fan fiction rape fantasy they tried to pass off as a work of non-fiction to get others to be complicit in believing the fantasy. The results are in and pretty damning to the author of the article who came back with this heartfelt apology...

"The past few months, since my Rolling Stone article 'A Rape on Campus' was first called into question, have been among the most painful of my life. Reading the Columbia account of the mistakes and misjudgments in my reporting was a brutal and humbling experience. I want to offer my deepest apologies: to Rolling Stone’s readers, to my Rolling Stone editors and colleagues, to the U.V.A. community, and to any victims of sexual assault who may feel fearful as a result of my article," she said in the statement.

Erdely concedes that she "didn't go far enough to verify her story."

"I allowed my concern for Jackie’s well-being, my fear of re-traumatizing her, and my confidence in her credibility to take the place of more questioning and more facts. These are mistakes I will not make again," she wrote in the statement.

“Reporting on rape has unique challenges, but the journalist still has the responsibility to get it right. I hope that my mistakes in reporting this story do not silence the voices of victims that need to be heard.”

^Note the fact that this bitch didn't bother to apologize to any of the men she accused of perpetrating this rape fantasy she and Rolling Stone cooked up... Hell yeah! Fight the misogynist patriarchy! You go girl!

My real reason for posting this though is just to outline how the left and its fellow travelers treat their own when they are disgraced. Not one person got shit-canned over this not even the supposed "fact checkers"! Imagine if a conservative publication made up a story about Bill Clinton raping people? It certainly would actually have more credibility that this piece of fiction.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/rolling-stone-a...d=30111150

[streaker69]

Being liberal means never having to be sincere.

[grumpyrocco]

Or honest

[Emoticon]

Or honest

It seems like these "journalists" these days have become so obsessed with apologizing for radical islam they have adopted the mantra of radical Islam in which it's fine to lie to the infidel if it's an effective means to an end. Take this Salon article for example, written by a person who claimed to be a gun owner who claimed to love guns previously, but has now changed his mind. His hit piece on guns reads like a fucking cartoon.

I signed up for some time on the pistol range, increasingly certain with each step that this would be the last time I ever held a gun. I felt uneasy, but I wanted to do this one final time. I began filling the clip to its capacity, ten rounds of .22 caliber long rifle. A mild sense of deja vu crept over me as I slipped the clip into the base of the pistol’s grip, locked it in place and pulled back the slide to place the first bullet into the chamber. I pushed the button on the left side of the stall to send the target swiftly 50 yards down range into the backdrop of tons of mounded sand, no more hand-pulled clothes lines to place the target. Everything progresses. I raised the pistol, took perfunctory aim and fired at the two foot square paper target.

The report was an authoritative ka-pow, much as I remember, the gun reaching skyward in a credible kick for a .22, three inches of ignited escape gas illuminating the tip of the muzzle in a brilliant blue-white flash. I remember loving the sound, look and feel of that experience. Now, I felt empty and out of place. There was no thrill left in firing a gun. The whole experience felt somehow unwholesome.

Man you know those .22s...they kick like fucking mules...The muzzle flash too! My God where are my sunglasses?! It's like firing a Mosin! My high powered pellet gun kicks harder than a .22 and it certainly doesn't "reach skyward" when I fire it unless you consider like 2-3 degrees of deflection "reaching skyward". Sand mounds at an indoor range?

Here's another good one:

My first visit, to an indoor pistol range in South Philadelphia, shocked me. It was filthy, nothing like the all-American halls I remember from my youth. The seedy personnel wore sidearms, not small caliber “personal” pieces, like the infamous Beretta .25, but big and powerful cannons, nuzzled into expensive breakaway holsters set high on the hip.

“I’ve noticed that all the staff here are carrying sidearms,” I said to the guy at the counter. “Why?”

A gun store\range where the shop staff carry guns :-O ?! Say it ain't so! Who does such a thing in this day and age?! What the hell do they need those "cannons" for?! Cannons that the writer was so knowledgeable about that the writer could tell the caliber they were while they were while still in their holsters! Everyone knows "sidearms" are only "cannons" and can never be small caliber!

and again!

It was all there: From sub-machine guns like the one brandished by FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover in a famous photo to $10,000 skeet guns to modern 1000-round-per-minute machine guns displayed from countless racks and shelves, and camouflaged sniper rifles set on tripods on the counter so one could see up-close a weapon that can put five bullets into someone’s eye from 1500 yards away.

Are there any civilian snipers, I wondered?

1500 yards? 5 Bullets in the eye? ~0.06 MOA? HOLY FUCK! That's a hell of a group! (I had to calculate that just for fun to see what the number would be)

It also seems to me that if you actually were a gun owner who met other real gun owners you not automatically make the connection between gun ownership and racism... Maybe I just don't hang out with the same kinds of people the author does though... It's almost as if the writer had never handled a gun before that point, but we know the liberal media never lies about something so serious!

http://www.salon.com/2015/04/06/a_gun_lo...rs_and_me/

BTW: This is one of the main players in cooking up the whole "white privilege" fantasy and all the other insane progressive nonsense you read.