Conservatives took a lot of heat in 2015 for things they didn’t say, thanks largely to uncharitable interpretations and downright sloppy reporting.
From headlines dinging former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush for using the word “retarded,” to articles claiming Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia said African-Americans can’t hack it at top universities, 2015 was filled with reports accusing conservatives of saying all sorts of stupid and horrible things.
Problem is, very little of what was reported was accurate.
Here are the seven worst examples of the media badly misquoting conservatives last year (in chronological order):
1. Scott Walker thinks ultrasounds are cool
Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker was criticized in May for supposedly saying forced ultrasounds are “just a cool thing for women.”
Walker was speaking in an interview about his support for a 2013 bill mandating that mothers seeking abortions must be provided with ultrasounds.
What actually happened: The two thoughts — Walker’s remarks on ultrasounds and his comments on the 2013 bill — were not exactly connected.
The governor first said that he was proud of his support for the bill. Later, he discussed ultrasounds and his memory of when he, the father of two sons, was introduced to the technology.
“Most people I talk to, whether they’re pro-life or not, I find people all the time who’ll get out their iPhone and show me a picture of their grandkids’ ultrasound and how excited they are, so that’s a lovely thing. I think about my sons are 19 and 20, you know we still have their first ultrasound picture. It’s just a cool thing out there,” he said.
2. Walker and the Canadian wall
Walker again found himself on the receiving end of mockery and criticism in August when newsrooms reported that he backed the idea of building a wall on the Canadian border.
The supposed moment occurred during an interview on NBC News’ “Meet the Press.”
What actually happened: The Wisconsin governor said that there are legitimate security concerns regarding the northern border.
“Some people have asked us about that in New Hampshire,” Walker said as he and his interviewer, Chuck Todd, talked over each other for a few seconds. “They raised some very legitimate concerns, including some law enforcement folks that brought that up to me at one of our town hall meetings about a week and a half ago. So that is a legitimate issue for us to look at.”
He added that addressing security concerns on the northern border would mean making sure that the “intelligence community has the ability for counterterrorism and the ability to go after the infrastructure they need to protect us.”
And that was it. There was never any talk of a wall.
3. Bush uses non-offensive word, people offended anyway
Jeb Bush was criticized in September for using the word “retarded,” despite there being nothing offensive about it.
What actually happened: The former Florida governor clearly used the word “retarded” to mean “slow development,” not as a slur against the disabled.
His remarks were about cultural assimilation in the United States.
“We should not have a multicultural society. When you create pockets of isolation, and in some cases, the assimilation process has been retarded, it’s wrong. It limits people’s aspirations,” Bush said.
4. A false Tweet creates a headache for Bush
The New Yorker’s Ryan Lizza tweeted in October that Jeb Bush shrugged and said “stuff happens” after being asked about mass shootings.
The reaction from the press was swift, as reporters and commentators joined to criticize Bush’s supposed callousness.
What actually happened: Bush said the call for more government intervention in the wake of mass shootings likely isn’t the way to go and that Americans need to address the problem on a personal level.
“What we end up doing lots of times is we create rules on the 99.999 percent of human activity that have nothing to do with the tragedy that forced the conversation about doing something,” he said at a campaign event in South Carolina. “And it won’t solve the problem of this tragedy that is just heartbreaking to see. Maybe we ought to be more connected in our communities.
“We’re in a time in our country and I don’t think more government is necessarily the answer to this,” he added. “I think we need to connect ourselves with everybody else. It’s just, it’s very sad to see. But I resist the notion — I had this challenge as governor because we had — look, stuff happens. There’s always a crisis and the impulse is always to do something, and it’s not necessarily the right thing to do.”
From all that, Lizza got: “In Greenville, South Carolina, Jeb Bush, arguing against calls for gun control after major tragedy, says, ‘stuff happens.'”
5. Rand Paul attacked as anti-gay
The media again reported on a thing supposedly said in October by a 2016 GOP presidential candidate, suggesting this time that Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., had shrugged off questions about workplace protections for members of the LGBT community.
Paul’s supposed dismissal of the question came during a campaign stop at Drake University.
What actually happened: Like Bush, Paul suggested that the answer to the question doesn’t lie in creating laws, but changes at the local and cultural level.
“I think, really, the things you do in your house, we could just leave those in your house and they wouldn’t have to be part of the workplace, to tell you the truth,” he said in response to a student’s question.
“These are very difficult decisions on what you decide will be employers’ decisions and not. And it really isn’t so much about that question as it is about — it sets up a classification, or a class of people, who can now sue,” he said. “So if you happen to be gay and you get fired, now you have a reason you can sue them. But it’s almost impossible sometimes. People don’t put up a sign and say, ‘I’m firing you because you’re gay.’ It’s something that’s very much disputed. And so I don’t know that we need to keep adding to different classifications to say the government needs to be involved in the hiring and firing.
“I think society is rapidly changing. If you are gay, there are plenty of places that will hire you. I would say the vast majority of corporations already privately have manuals, or work manuals, that say that they don’t discriminate in any way,” he added.
The press accused Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, of wrongfully suggesting in December that a “transgendered leftist activist” was the man accused of a deadly shooting outside of a Planned Parenthood facility in Colorado.
The Texas senator’s remarks came as he warned reporters to wait on all the facts before drawing conclusions about the man accused of killing three people, including a pro-life police officer.
What actually happened: Cruz merely urged restraint.
There was a lot of information floating around at the time regarding the suspected shooter’s motivations, including right-wing websites claiming that he may have been a “transgendered leftist activist.”
But none of it was verified, Cruz noted, so it would behoove reporters to hold fire until all the facts were confirmed.
“I think there’s been some vicious rhetoric on the Left blaming those who are pro-life,” Cruz said, according to the Texas Tribune.
“It’s also been reported that he was registered as an independent and a woman and a transgendered leftist activist. If that’s what he is, I don’t think it’s fair to blame the rhetoric on the Left. This is a murderer,” he added. “The media promptly wants to blame him on the pro-life movement when, at this point, there’s very little evidence to indicate that.”
From these comments, headlines soon said that Cruz accused a “transgendered leftist activist” of carrying out the shooting.
Justice Antonin Scalia was next up for criticism in December after the press accused him of suggesting that African-Americans aren’t good enough to attend top universities.
Scalia’s comments were made during the untelevised oral arguments for the case Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin, which deals with the Texas university’s affirmative action admissions policy.
What actually happened: Scalia suggested no such thing. He was referring to an amicus brief filed by two members of the U.S. Civil Rights Commission, which argued that affirmation action hurts the people it’s supposed to help.
The point of oral arguments is to give the Supreme Court justices an opportunity to poke holes in presented legal arguments. That is, the justices are looking for weaknesses in the arguments they hear and aren’t discussing their own beliefs.
The amicus brief referred to by Scalia details the none-too-uncommon “mismatch” theory, which has long been an argument put forward by skeptics of affirmative action.
He never suggested that African-Americans aren’t good enough for higher education.
