Reading the Associatated Press posting of this news event (Pro-Health Care protester bites finger off of 65 year old opponent of the health care bill), I see twisting of the facts of the event. I re-direction of the focus.
I say in the Title "AP Takes Side of Violent Protester" because AP makes it a point that the victim has Medicare.
What does that have to do with the violent reaction of the pro-health care protester. It takes the focus off of him and puts the focus on the fact that the victim (a 65 year old man) had Medicare and got his finger re-attached. So what's the victim protesting for, is the message I take away from the article.
Read the article, what do you think?
Finger bitten off during California health portest
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDelete