Wingnut hysteria baseless, boy do they look stupid
Readers, keep in mind that these are not fringe wingnut bloggers slinging these accusations. They have completely crackpot fringe thinking, but they are in the mainstream of conservative punditry these days. Greenwald’s closing paragraph:
Howard Kurtz puts Hinderaker on CNN virtually every weekend. Malkin and Horowitz are treated like respectable pundits on Fox and other stations. And yet their standards for what they assert are no different than Star Magazine or the lowest, bottom-feeding liars who literally invent facts at will. They spent the whole weekend trying to inflame hatred against the NYT by telling their readers that the NYT article deliberately endangered Don Rumsfeld's security in order to retaliate against him - even though that could not possibly have been true based on known facts, and even though Don Rumsfeld himself authorized the use of those photographs. What possible defense is there for this behavior, and what rational person would consider Malkin, Hinderaker, Horowitz, Red State -- all of them -- even the slightest bit credible in the future?These people are given credibility by the mass media all the time. Read that Tom Tomorrow cartoon I linked to yesterday. Then keep in mind what Atrios said: “…though sadly reality is fast outpacing his ability to do satire.” (You can also read Atrios’ take on the Greenwald post I’m discussing.) Things are broken, folks. I only hope that now that the MSM (main stream media) is being attacked so openly, they’ll realize that their strategy of giving a platform to hatred in order to boost ratings (I’m assuming that’s why they do it) has a cost, and one that will be paid by them.
And to think they feel threatened by Daily Kos. If CNN doesn’t wake up soon, I’m going to have to use the nuclear option of blogofascism: I’ll start calling them wankers.