So how many of these incidents were spun in a way which misdirected the American people and landed an innocent filmmaker in jail? How many of these incidents had the government spokesfolk lying to us about them - not "information later shows they were mistaken" but "information later shows they knew the truth and chose not to use it in their explanations"? Unless all of those above were like that, they are irrelevant to this issue. They are not related. This is not about "Republicans" being inconsistent about when they choose to be outraged. By the way - let's go ahead and presume that in the past we were lied to and the GOP (or even Democrats) were not outraged in a manner sufficient to our elevated (now) future tastes: does that mean that all further incidents get a pass? Are you REALLY saying that "because they didn't get what WE think is mad enough in the past they are now not allowed to get mad?" Yeesh. I expected, I dunno, basic reason and intelligence brought here when I read this piece, not juvenile partisan shots using "logic" which would be torn apart in < 30 seconds at even a second-rate debate club's practice session.
Maybe we do need Zombie Cronkite - he'd be partisan but he'd try harder than the blow-dried brigade and Juicebox Mafia and the current poor crop of partisans feeding the echo chambers on both sides. And he'd deliver news without hyperbole or blatantly obvious (and readily debunked and therefore dismissed) spin.
That last bit is really the critical part: you do yourself and your cause(s) no service by using such weak structures to frame your dissent or disagreement - nobody educated enough to see the flaws gives you much beyond the time of day once you exhibit such ill-advised constructions. And you lose the middle, keeping only the hyper-partisans and the low-info crowd, both of whom are either incapable or unwilling to unwind any tangles in your presented cords, because they want your words to be true (and in some cases lack the skills to reason).
So how many of these incidents were spun in a way which misdirected the American people and landed an innocent filmmaker in jail? How many of these incidents had the government spokesfolk lying to us about them - not "information later shows they were mistaken" but "information later shows they knew the truth and chose not to use it in their explanations"? Unless all of those above were like that, they are irrelevant to this issue. They are not related. This is not about "Republicans" being inconsistent about when they choose to be outraged. By the way - let's go ahead and presume that in the past we were lied to and the GOP (or even Democrats) were not outraged in a manner sufficient to our elevated (now) future tastes: does that mean that all further incidents get a pass? Are you REALLY saying that "because they didn't get what WE think is mad enough in the past they are now not allowed to get mad?" Yeesh. I expected, I dunno, basic reason and intelligence brought here when I read this piece, not juvenile partisan shots using "logic" which would be torn apart in < 30 seconds at even a second-rate debate club's practice session.
Maybe we do need Zombie Cronkite - he'd be partisan but he'd try harder than the blow-dried brigade and Juicebox Mafia and the current poor crop of partisans feeding the echo chambers on both sides. And he'd deliver news without hyperbole or blatantly obvious (and readily debunked and therefore dismissed) spin.
That last bit is really the critical part: you do yourself and your cause(s) no service by using such weak structures to frame your dissent or disagreement - nobody educated enough to see the flaws gives you much beyond the time of day once you exhibit such ill-advised constructions. And you lose the middle, keeping only the hyper-partisans and the low-info crowd, both of whom are either incapable or unwilling to unwind any tangles in your presented cords, because they want your words to be true (and in some cases lack the skills to reason).