David Brooks
Works for crooks.
Buying their lies,
thrill up his thighs.

Thanks Barack: from post-racial to most-racial in just six months!

I put together a little montage of Bushitler type attacks you might like to see.

http://tinyurl.com/lq57s6

I got the idea after a newbusters post about msnbc talking about the joker poster.  

http://tinyurl.com/le8krj

The Hitler stuff started years ago, so Pelosi et al just need to can it.

Something else is going on here, and its just another example of NBC's unethical journalism.  David Brooks should have known Nacy Pelosi's comments started this, and that protesters are regularly being called racists by obscure wack jobs on the left. But its obvious he didn't know that. Had the Hitler comparisons emerged in a vacuum, it would have been insane, but in the context of Pelosi's comments, its something else.

This is the exact problem with tit for tat rhetoric. Pelosi's comments  were deplorable.  The right gives her a little tit for tat and the media twists it into deplorable behavior on the right.

From what I see, Brooks was shown half a story and asked to respond. Yes, Brooks should have known it was a half a story, but I don't think he did.

I am the mob. Don't tread on me.

They've created a standard format when reporting on the protests.

1. Start with the most extreme criticism of the healthcare plan (they're going to kill Granny)
2. Laugh that criticism off as lunacy
3. Ask how the Democrats are going to fight the lunacy

The rhetorical tactic is obvious: highlight the extreme criticism, and then portray all of the criticisms as part of the same extreme. You can then wave off all of the opposition by lumping it all under the same extremism.

• You notice that the media goes right to the extreme. They laugh off the idea that some death panel will vote to kill granny. But they never address the more likely effects of the public option, or any of the other substantive criticisms.
• They figure that once they convince the viewer that the citizens are bringing silly fears to the protests, they can get the viewer to believe that all of the criticisms are also silly.
• And then, they turn the whole thing into a merely political scrimmage. Instead of a legitimate argument of ideas, the media turns it into a public relations dispute. How can the White House fight such disinformation?

The media is actively distorting the criticisms, and actively promoting the White House.  

By the way, every single media report has been from the Democrat perspective. How many Republicans have been interviewed about what they think of the protests?

I sure wish that every conservative in America could get together and sponsor a public request to David Brooks and Kathleen Parker to stop posing as concerned conservatives on national media.

The "Mainstream" Media: By liberals. For liberals.

I used to watch Meet the Press when Russert was host.  But as NBC when further and further left, I went more and more exclusively to Fox News.  It just got to the point I couldn't stand to hear the one-sided spin offered on virtually all of their "news" (sic) shows.  I know the libs like to spin Fox as right wing, but they DO have liberals on their shows, and they do make a better effort to show both sides of issues.

That said, I turned on Meet the Press Sunday for the perhaps the second time since Gregory took over.  Just in time to see him introduce this 3 person panel.  My first thought was "Jeez, someone from the NYTs, Newsweek and CNBC.  This won't be good."  And it wasn't.  It went right to calling Limbaugh insane.  With no one suggesting a common sense counter-point to this loon's bombastic insult.

I like to think Russert wouldn't have had 3 left wing loons addressing this issue.  But if he did, I suspect he would have made an effort to offer a counter-point.  But Gregory fits the mold of NBC's brand of "news" (sic).  Which is why Meet the Press and NBC News (sic) is going down the tubes.

 Baring a bailout from Obama, NBC and the rest of the MSM all deserve their falling viewership and relevance.  

How is Nancy Pelosi saying town hall participants were showing up with swastikas, etc. that is a fact that some, not all, do show up portraying Obama as Hitler. Unless she directly said, providing quotes, that these protesters are Hitler like, or Nazi like.

Wouldn't the town hall participants have started this by showing up with Nazi signs comparing Obama to Hitler in the first place?

Radical leftist protesters have compared Bush to Hitler in the past, which was also wrong and over the line. But the difference is, unless someone can prove me wrong, I don't think the 'mainstream' media ever compared Bush to Hitler or Nazis. Rush Limbaugh is followed by millions and he has constantly compared Democrats to Nazi, and Hitler.

It would be nice to qualify "I've been listening to the left compare George W. Bush to Hitler for eight years. I've been listening to Democrats and the left compare conservatism to Nazis my whole career." How about some examples, some quotes.

That kind of rhetoric is insane, no matter which political party says it. 

Didn't the democratics open the door to comparison of the Bamster to fascists when they made campaign posters like the famous 'Change' poster in the style of 1930's fascist socialist and communist socialist propaganda? There are stunning similarities between the campaign graphics of Mussolini, Hitler, and Stalin and that of the Bamster. If the democratics didn't want to stimulate comparisons of their candidate to the totalitarians of the 1930's, why did they open that door?

I heard poor pretend to be NYTs/msm token conservative yesterday morning, I knew Rush would most likely respond today...and he did.

Funny he stated an opinion regarding something he hadn't even heard.

Typical leftist.

Seems O did the same not that long ago, rather 'stupidly.'

Obama's a Community Agitator, a walking, talking destroyer. ~ Rush Limbaugh