< .comment-link {margin-left:.6em;}

Massachusetts Liberal

Observations on politics, the media and life in Massachusetts and beyond from the left side of the road.

Friday, July 20, 2007

All the facts, please

Interesting column today by Steve Bailey and his experiences with the gun lobby. Nice analysis by Dan Kennedy over at Media Nation about the NRA wannabe that is calling for Bailey's firing.

But in re-reading what ran yesterday before Bailey's "confession," I was struck by one missing piece from the Herald's take on this story: Isn't it relevant that Bailey's accuser, Alan Gottlieb, is a convicted felon (filing a false tax return) who had his gun purchasing privileges revoked and then restored under a "second chance" program.

A lot of questions arise from that, all questions the Herald did not answer (not to mention did not report).
  • The most obvious ones go to credibility of Gottlieb (he was convicted of lying after all).
  • Why was he given a second chance?
  • Did the ATF investigate him as thoroughly as they investigated Bailey and his associates?
I would have thought those would be important questions responsible editors and reporters would ask before printing a story.

Labels: , ,

4 Comments:

Blogger Bruce said...

Typical.

If you can't refute a person's argument through facts and reason, attack his credibility.

Charles manson could be making these charges against Steve bailey, it doesn't affect the validity of the charges.

Stick to the facts.

Attacking Mr. Gottleib for his past actions serves only to change the subject and protect Bailey from scrutiny.

July 21, 2007 8:43 AM  
Blogger Outraged Liberal said...

Mr. Gottlieb was convicted on a felony that involved lying. That is a fact. And that fact requires checking the credibility of the accuser.

The Herald account offers scrutiny of Bailey's actions -- and Bailey has been fully forthcoming.

But the Herald account conveniently ignores facts that would tend to discredit its agenda -- namely taking a swipe at the Globe.

Typical.

July 21, 2007 9:10 AM  
Blogger Bruce said...

This story was out there, and these "charges" against Bailey were first made long before the SAF entered the picture.

Gottleib's involvement is fairly irrelevant here. They just have a better PR department, and the Herald took notice.

July 21, 2007 4:09 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Gottleib's involvement is fairly irrelevant here."

Why is it irrelevant? Because you said so?

What crime is Mr. Bailey supposed to have committed? Embarrassing a gun night in public, maybe?

I'd love to know if you're as selective in your defense of the Ten Commandments as you are about the Bill of Rights.

July 23, 2007 6:09 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home