HomeFox News LiesSURPRISE! Fox “News” Lies Again, Deceptively Edits Obama Speech! (video)

SURPRISE! Fox “News” Lies Again, Deceptively Edits Obama Speech! (video)

The David Packman Show exposes the professional liars at fox in this short clip. How did Fox “News” deceptively edit a speech by President Obama in order to convince their idiot viewers that the President’s position on guns was hypocritical?

See for yourself in the video below:

Share on RedditShare on LinkedInDigg thisShare on StumbleUponPin on PinterestShare on TumblrShare on Google+Email this to someonePrint this page

About AATTP

AATTP
Americans Against The Tea Party is a group committed to exposing the Tea Party’s lies, violence, racism, ignorance, intolerance, bigotry, and corporatist fascist efforts to subvert our democratic process – and we are organizing to defeat Tea Party/GOP candidates on ballots everywhere.
  • Charlie

    The argument about the constitution fails miserably.. Well regulated militia? If you buy into the militia part which would be willful ignorance then why not the well regulated part?
    The fact that criminals can buy guns easily over the internet or at gun shows should be a bigger worry for your families sake.
    Of all the guns for family protection the vast majority of shooting in homes kills those same family members.
    In the last 40 years a few hundred lives have been saved by guns regarding home invasion yet over 1 million Americans are now dead by guns.
    The argument that people kill not guns is infuriating to logic. Guns make that killing so easy a 2 year old can do it. I would rather someone try to kill me and you without one.
    I understand peoples fear and concerns and we all should but guns lose to facts and figures and common sense.
    A bad guy with a gun theory is a fear tactic for a few reasons. A bad guy will kill people before the “good guy” can draw his gun 99 times out of a 100.
    you gun is much more likely to kill a family member then a bad guy by multiples of thousands.
    We should all care what the best way to make us safer. Guns have been proven not to do that over and over. People fantasy of killing home invaders happens so rarely it should not be relevant to the argument of gun control.
    Lastly Nobody wants to take away shotguns (sadly) Handguns have 1 purpose, even lynard skynard knew that.
    Sadly most will never change their hearts and minds no matter what truths appear before them.
    People are either scared or selfish or both.
    40 years and 1 million deaths versus terrorism which has killed roughly 4000 in that same time and the USA invades an innocent country and now pays over 250.000 …while gun control is balked at. This I need to protect my family angle shoud lead to gun control as your family for a fact is in more danger without it :-(

    • Charlie

      Sorry for grammar mistakes. Meant to point out that the USA now pays over 250000 people for homeland security over terrorism which has killed 4000 roughly in last 40 years compared to over 1 million killed by guns.

      • Bob Wilson

        No need to, your point is well taken!

    • Frank DePauw

      Guns, guns, guns. How about cars? How many killed by auto, DUI or not? Do we take them away?

      • Bob Wilson

        Ummm, I think cars have to be registered and drivers, the people who drive the cars, kind of like shooters, the people that shoot the guns, have to pass a drivers test and have a license. So what is your point here??

        • Frank DePauw

          Dear Bob,
          Cars, guns, whatever. It’s just that everyone wants to ban guns. My position, is ,if you want to have a gun, provided that you use it wisely,ie: hunting, target shooting,(I used to belong to a traveling pistol team), or home protection, you should have that right! The deaths by guns are more often than not, happens when some deranged individual, decides to take it to “the streets”, unlicensed, unregistered, and most of all,untrained! Don’t blame the guns, blame the people who use them in the commission of a crime, and pass laws “with teeth”. Use of a gun, in the commission of a crime, should bring a 25 year sentence,no parole. Being caught on the street with an illegal firearm, same thing! Toughen up the penalties for improper use, don’t push for bans!! I know you’ve heard this before, but it is so true, “people kill people”, the gun is just the means. The killing could be done just as easy with a kitchen knife. Do we want to register or ban them? I don’t think so.
          Respectfully,
          Frank

          • Bob Wilson

            Frank, come on man, read what people write, what people say when they ask for tougher laws, I have not hear one call for a ban on guns, ever. I have a couple of hand guns, my OLD service 1911 is still my favorite, and everything from a 17 cal. To a 30/30, but each one was registered and I was background checked. What is so damn restrictive about that?

          • Frank DePauw

            Dear Bob,
            Not a thing! The 1911 45, although only good at close range, is a nice piece. I have no problem at all with background checks, but those that do have a problem, have no difficulty in obtaining a weapon of their choice. Guns , and I mean, GUNS, can be purchased on the streets of just about any major city, the only requirement, CASH! NY, Detroit, and the “City of Brotherly Love” come to mind, immediately. Need a Glock, Uzi, Sten, M-16 with a 90 round clip, they are out there, and it scares the hell out of me, that this goes on as a daily business. I doubt that more than a very small percentage of guns, used in commission of a crime, or are the cause of death, are legally purchased, much less backgrounded!
            I do feel, that if an upstanding member of the community wants a full auto,(why, I don’t know), that person should be allowed to have it. By the way, my piece of choice, is a S&W Model 59, 9mm semi.
            Gun control, is being able to hit your target, not taking guns from good citizens.
            Yes, cars are supposed to be registered, and drivers are supposed to be licensed, but when was the last time you watched “Judge Judy”?
            Frank

          • Bob Wilson

            Glad you like your S&W 9mm, tried one and returned it, quality sucked. I have no problems with accuracy on my Colt 911. And wow, really going to use that argument that bad guys don’t obey laws, give me a break! Drunk drivers don’t obey laws either, nor do pedafiles or bank robbers.

          • Frank DePauw

            Dear Bob,
            Sorry you had problems. Mine had a jamming problem, fixed with silver tip hollows. The 1911 is designed not to jam, and that’s why it rattles a bit if you shake it.
            You are totally correct, and prove my point. Cars don’t kill people, drivers do. Especially when under the influence of their choice of liquor, drug, etc.Seems they tried to stop that back in the ’20’s, but was overturned a few years years later. Of course, you could also own a Thompson 1928 back then.
            So, as far as gun control, yes, law abiding citizens should be able to have a firearm of their choice, and stricter laws , or even the ones in effect today, should be followed, and prosecuted to the full extent of the law. Most “perps” are back on the street, before the police finish the report! THAT has to stop. Enacting laws with “teeth”, might or might not stop or even slow down what we are facing now, but damn well worth a try!
            Lock up the dwi’s, and let them spend a year in the tank. I take a cab, if I’ve had one too many for the road, or go out with a designated driver. If I see him having a few, I’m on the phone to the cab company. Can’t get a cab where you live? Drink at home. Too many are on the “wrong side of the grass” because of drinking and driving!
            As far as the guns go, I, apparently unlike yourself, have heard an uproar on everything from limiting the size of the “mag”, to what weapons should be banned and taken away. Seems that the government is a little soft on shotguns, as long as it only can holds three rounds. This is current law in a few states, but in Texas, they have drive through windows that sell beer to pickup truck drivers,(actually anyone with proper ID”, and a rifle mounted on the rear window glass
            Seems we are on the same side, as far as this goes.
            Frank

          • Frank DePauw

            In re: to Charlie’s rant, he admits that several hundred homeowners lives were saved by home owners with guns. Great! Now, how did the “millions ” of people die from guns in the last 40 years, and is he including military? He states that a 2 year old can kill. Sure can! But whose to blame that a firearm gets into the hands of a 2 year old? And why wasn’t it locked, or at utmost least, kept out of range of the 2 year old? Time for a law holding the parent or guardian responsible!
            At 7 years old, I taught my son how to handle a firearm, shoot it, clean it, and most of all to respect it. To this day, he is a fine hunter, and unlike certain politicos, has never fired his weapon, until he had a clear shot. Training is most important, and keeping control of the weapon, until the child has shown he can handle it,and reached an age of reason! (Take down, cleaning, and re-assembly), is a father’s (or mother’s) responsibility.
            Also, the fact that the good guy gets shot before he can draw down, is a matter of fact. The bad guy is ready to take what he wants, including your life, and will approach with weapon drawn. What if he couldn’t get a gun, by empowering the existing laws?
            I think if he knew there was a chance of getting caught, and face “life without parole”, it may or may not happen. It will cause him to think first, at least I know it would for me! With cameras everywhere, including phones, more and more thugs are removed from the streets, daily!
            Charlie’s remark,” your gun is much more likely to kill a family member then a bad guy by multiples of thousands”, just isn’t so. Check your facts, and reply!.
            Charlie also made reference to Lynnard Skynnard, I guess to their song
            “Give me back my bullets”. Van Zant was saying he wanted his bullets back, to quote,”Gimme back my bullets
            Put ‘em back where they belong
            Ain’t foolin’ around ’cause I done had my fun
            Ain’t gonna see no more damage done
            Gimme back my bullets ”
            And his statement that 4000 people were killed in the last 40 years do to terrorism, should have picked up a paper on 9/12/2001, where the total of deaths was over 4000 in a couple of hours! Almost 400 “heroes”, in the FD, PD, and EMT’s.
            Charlie, wake up, you are in la-la land!
            Frank
            .

    • Frank DePauw

      Terrorism killed almost 4000 people in 1 day! Remember 9/11/01? LETS GET SOME NUMBERS STRAIGHT !!!

  • Perochiar

    Filthy liberals. All you do is look at the times guns have been used in the wrong hands, and not when they have actually been useful. You wouldn’t want our soldiers to defend us with muskets and bayonets, would you?

    • Daniel

      Perhaps not, but I would love you to have to use those. It’s a lot harder for misfires, gang violence, school shootings, and people who are looking to use guns for violent purposes that do not include hunting, if you have to pull out your powder, patch, and ball and hammer it in there between each shot.

    • http://www.facebook.com/kec1964 Kevin Cody

      Filthy. Umm, good manners must also be a liberal virtue.

      “Endless war wasn’t just destructive in its own right, but is something that ensures that America’s “soul becomes totally poisoned”, fosters “spiritual death”, perpetuates the “malady within the American spirit”, and elevates “the Western arrogance of feeling that it has everything to teach others and nothing to learn from them.” In sum, to pursue endless war is “to worship the god of hate” and “bow before the altar of retaliation”.-g greenwald/MLK”

    • Bob Wilson

      WTF! Did you even read what he wrote? Get me a break, you can’t be that ignorant!

  • Bill

    I don’t see the lie.

    They stopped the clip after the relevant portion was over. Obama’s new legislation calls for the reinstatement and strengthening of the assault weapons ban, which is in direct opposition to what he stated in the video clip they played.

    The next sentence that has David Packman’s panties in a bunch in not relevant because that is not what is being challenged. If the new legislation only addressed things like background checks then there would be no issue (at least not about Obama “flip-flopping”).

    In terms of a flip-flop, the only portion of his new legislation that could be a flip-flop is the weapons ban, and so the portion of his speech that they aired is the only portion relevant to that.

    I don’t see how failing to include non-relevant portions of the speech is considered lying.

  • Pingback: Gay dad asks Laura Bush to support gay marriage | The Next Family()

  • Pingback: Rob Watson: A Gay Dad Open Letter to Laura Bush, leave the gay marriage ad | ADAAIR.NET()

  • Pingback: Knews Feed » Rob Watson: A Gay Dad's Open Letter to Laura Bush on Quitting the Gay Marriage Ad()

  • Pingback: A Gay Dad’s Open Letter to Laura Bush on Quitting the Gay Marriage Ad | evoL =()

  • daniel

    is this all there is and u stress fox lies look and msnbc and cnn… wtf.. we all bye that time new that he already had a plan to reduce bullets in magazine, and pushing for these scary looking ar to be banned.. so them not showing this final part of speech was little less than deseptive. but msnbc crops the damn audio completly eliminating words in between.. by not showing entire speech is not as deseptive as cropping words out..(msnbc)

    • http://twitter.com/mcspocky McSpocky (@mcspocky)

      At least the other networks don’t leave you less informed than people who watch no news at all. Faux news does!
      http://youtu.be/hdT6d35oxxw

      • s garcia

        the main message i get from my local news is that they are t e leaders in breaking news… teasers to watch later… and very little information about who, what, where and Why something is happening… too commercial.

    • Frank DePauw

      If you want to leave an expertise statement, learn to spell! Even your computer knows how to spell check! That is one of the biggest problems with the younger people. They learn how to spell by sending text messages,, which is a language all it’s own.
      I have a hard time taking advice from people who haven’t taken the time to correctly earn a 6th grade diploma!

  • Janet Brookey

    Can someone tell me why it took David Parkman 4 years to tell the world? The speech was made in 2008! I hope he takes all automatics, semi-automatics, handguns. The American people have proven their too damn stupid to have weapons! Another school shooting today! I vote for muskets and powder horn. It’s what they used when they wrote the 2nd amendment. There is no way our forefathers could have imagined what we, as Americans, would do to ourselves. If you can use a weapon for food, it will also serve as defense. No one NEEDS handguns. Their only purpose is for the destruction of mankind.

    • Hank

      He didn’t wait 4 years. Fox just recently reported that Obama was being hypocritical because of what he said during the election vs. now. Since they cut the line that shows that his position hasn’t changed, they are lying about it now.

    • Scott

      They’re is no way you can tell me that there too stupid for this or that while you can’t even use proper grammar in that their comment of yours.

      • james

        that ” there “

        • http://None Bob

          James, are you really surprised, lol

      • Diane S.

        Your grammar needs revisions too.

        • jamie smith

          I think he switched them both on purpose.. And most gun owners are very responsible people. Stop being dumb. It is not the guns, it is the people. No matter what you do, crazy people will murder other people. Get over the gun bit, you’re looking in the wrong direction.We need better care for people with special needs. Not more laws for the people that already obey the law.

      • http://twitter.com/mcspocky McSpocky (@mcspocky)

        I think American stupidity about guns is pretty accurate. Just look at the gun that are now being marketed toward kids, and come in smaller sizes and bright colors so they look like toys. Guns made for kids between the ages of 4 and 10 seems very stupid to me. Probably a lot of other people would agree now since a 5 year old killed his 2 year old sister after receiving one of these gun as a gift. American stupidity about guns at its finest. :(

    • maliha davis

      I agree Janet, it’s just like when a child misuses an item (like a pencil for instance), as a parent (leader, or even teacher) we take it away for that child’s safety as well as for the safety of others. Take them ALL away,,,

      • Gay

        …Except the constitution doesn’t state that children have the right to bear pencils, but it does, in fact, state that we, as American citizens, have the right to arms.

        A question to you and all people like you: Are you really too stupid to understand WHY the government would be breaking the laws of the constitution if they took away our guns, or is it that you just wish the constitution said something differently and you’re determined to live in your own reality in hopes that the government will come in to take them away, in spite of the document that is a large part of the foundation of our country? Which is it?

        • Murika

          right to bear arms; “This right was described by Blackstone as an auxiliary right, supporting the natural rights of self-defense, resistance to oppression, and the civic duty to act in concert in defense of the state.”

          Yep, glad Americans are sticking with the second amendment….if people can’t use them responsibly like other countries do they should have them taken away

        • John Lyon

          Get over your constitution bs dude. Politics evolve, you can’t cling to some paper that is clearly outdated. It was done in a time where your founder fathers could not have anticipated this insane growth in weaponry advancement. If your government wants you dead it’s sending those lovely drones, dropping nukes, busting tanks through your front door. Your damn shotgun or pistols or whatever is not going to stop them, give it up you’re just hurting yourself and others… Americans smh.

          • Frank DePauw

            As a former member of the armed forces, I can say that if the Government wants your weapons, they will get them! Unfortunately, after they take them away, how do we protect ourselves from the street thug, or house burglar (usually already in the house before you can reach a phone)? Police, who are sworn to protect, can’t. Not that they don’t want to, but their hands are tied with so much crime, that they don’t have the manpower to “protect” us individually. A police officer, usually gets to take a report of the problem, and not stop it. I can get my shotgun, dispatch the “bad guy”, and have my family in safety, while waiting for the police to arrive to take “the report”.

    • kev richardson

      WELL SaID jANET , in nutshell….

    • daniel

      can we have cannons and bayonnets too?

    • http://twitter.com/mcspocky McSpocky (@mcspocky)

      You are so right. Interestingly enough is that the NRA was FOR background checks back in the 90s. Apparently they are receiving so much money from the firearm industry that that chose to be against background checks now in order to keep the money flowing. That’s also the big reason the Teapublicans are fighting to not allow background checks as well.

    • Frank DePauw

      Never been confronted by a bad guy, have you!!

      • Michael mangen

        I am also a Veteran of the Vietnam Nam fiasco and own guns but have no fear of thugs without one. What are people afraid of? As far as I know,the boogie man has no gun. Obviously, I am not an educated man but know my beliefs and will post my opinion. Warts and all!

  • http://facebook RON

    if stations like this gets a million $$$$$$ fine for lying they won’t do it again

  • http://anex-unnecessaryblogage.blogspot.fr/ Anex

    While I don’t doubt it in the least, and have absolutely NO DESIRE to watch the idiots at Fox running their mouth, I think the proof argument would have been a little stronger if the footage from Fox News had been shown as well. I see it too easy to be picked apart as doing the same thing when only half the proof footage is shown. :/

    I can only assume however that due to copyright or whatever that was probably why it wasn’t shown.

  • Melvin Haun Sr

    FOX no news propaganda machine ies? Say it ain’t so. (sarcasm in case you missed it )

    • http://twitter.com/mcspocky McSpocky (@mcspocky)

      Some very good sarcasm.

      What’s really sad is that a lot of Faux news viewers believe every word that Faux news spews.

Scroll To Top
website security Website Security Test