Emphasis on the second word.

Regards,
Peter H.

And I think you’re confusing “frustrated” with “angry.” I sensed no anger in the reportage “You Say You Want a Revolution,” only good-humored commentary and the stating of fact.

The media put glowing profiles of the Sheehag in glossy magazines, fawned over her on morning and daytime chat shows, followed her around and handed her a microphone at every opportunity while taking care not to cover her anti-semitic remarks or mentioning the $500,000 she and Code Pink raised to send to terrorists in Iraq.

Rick Santelli has gotten maybe 5% of the coverage Sheehan did, and instead of the glowing profiles was called a nut by Matt Lauer. “Ranting nut” has been the tone of most of the media coverage he has garnered.

Neither gained a critical mass of media coverage because of the absence of a compelling story.

Stephen, are you honestly trying to claim that the MSM ignored the anti-Bush Iraq War protests the same way they ignore the anti-spending, anti-socialist protests happening now? Were you living in a cave on Mars with both fingers in your ears these past eight years.

I understand your desire to defend the media. After all, they’re your team. You have to keep pretending that they are somewhat objective and not, as they are, the public relations wing of the DNC. But the fact of the matter is, anti-Bush protests always received prominent and favorable play during the Bush Administration because it suited the purposes of the left. The anti-socialism protests are being ignored because the media, as Chris Matthews admitted, are invested in Obama and want him to succeed.

While we do not know whether or how the anti-spending protests will grow to include unlikely constituencies, the anti-war protests only received significant media attention when they included “man bites dog” characters. At first, Cindy Sheehan was such an unlikely protester who was able to attract the attention of the press, as the mother of a soldier, but eventually she became too over-exposed for her own (or the cause’s) good. Since Sheehan’s peak, it’s almost all been downhill in the media for the anti-war crowd. The anti-surge era was that movement’s last hurrah.

Until the anti-spending protests gain their own unlikely characters, complaining about a lack of news coverage seems either premature or just plain whiny. As I said, conservatives are protesting spending just as liberals protested war. This is not news.

In fact, I would say that concern over out-of-control spending is getting as much, if not more news attention than war protests!

Here, Stephen, you are not responding to Bruce’s post.

He’s comparing the mainstream news media’s treatment of war protesting during the Bush administration with its treatment of tax-and-spend protesting during the Obama administration.

You’ve screwed up Bruce’s complaint. He was never talking about anti-war and anti-tax protests both directed at Obama. That comparison would reveal the MSM’s attitude toward the two complaints.

What Bruce is concerned about is the MSM’s treatment of protests against Bush and the Republicans as compared to its treatment of protests against Obama and the Democrats.

Are you going to say he has no cause for complaint whatsoever?

But all too often you play “the lazy conservative” – victim of the conspiratorial liberal MSM, angry at the world. This post is a great example. I have no doubt that the density of points on the map above could be seen on a map of war protests, albeit with a different geographic balance. Your complaint that such an anti-war map would get “national news coverage every day bordering on hysteria” is absurd – there are many, many war protests out there, and I would hardly describe news coverage of them as over-the-top. In fact, I would say that concern over out-of-control spending is getting as much, if not more news attention than war protests!

I enjoy reading smart takes from a gay conservative. There are few places on the web for the type of content you are capable of producing. Why are you using your megaphone for standard-issue whining? I can read that anywhere! Here’s a hope for more engaging content from your unique and valuable perspective.

Except, of course, we patriots.

One lump or two?

Regards,
Peter H.