Who knew the Christian Science Monitor was a shrill lefty rag? You may expect to hear that charge shortly, because following up on Friday night’s attempted one-man attack at the Pentagon, their story leads off as follows:
John Patrick Bedell: Did right-wing extremism lead to shooting?
Authorities have identified John Patrick Bedell as the gunman in the Pentagon shooting. He appears to have been a right-wing extremist with virulent antigovernment feelings.
As you can see, it is now clear that the CSM can no longer be trusted.
You can have wealth concentrated in the hands of a few, or democracy. But you cannot have both.
Whatever Works 
Man Moe, (or is it Woman Moe):
I missed this beauty yesterday.
You’ve really got this one backwards. Here, I can’t summarize how wrong you are any better than this wonderful summary. This was a crazed, Bush hatin’ truther.
Your kind of man!
http://pajamasmedia.com/zombie/2010/03/05/anti-bush-truther-shoots-up-pentagon-should-we-play-the-political-blame-game/
LikeLike
I never said what I thought. I said that because the CSM asked the question in print, they will now be maligned.
The guy is a ‘truther’ as far as I know. The post isn’t about him. It’s about media and reaction to it. Am I that obtuse?
LikeLike
Not obtuse…gullible. You’re treating the CSM as some type of righty rag gone bad.
At best, it is middle of the road.
LikeLike
Politically middle of the road is probably exactly right. They’ve never had a political identity far as I know.
But now that they’ve asked THAT question, they will be called lefty. For a few days anyway. Then those name callers will move on to the next target.
LikeLike