Monday, April 19, 2010

Sorry, but I don't agree...

with this. If we're going to sit on our hands, THAT is how we're playing into theirs because in a way we're letting them define us as "a bunch of racist rednecks upset over having a black president." I would think the truth about the tea partiers at the least is already getting out, namely, that they're not a bunch of racist mouth-breathing rednecks -- and this is revealed even to certain liberal columnists who, you know, actually GO to the tea parties:

Based on what I saw and heard, tea party members are not seething, ready-to-explode racists, as some liberal commentators have caricatured them.
Even without this particular phenomenon, we don't have just the Big Three networks and big-city coastal papers telling the story anymore. Even if we did, though, well, does it really matter that much -- considering that the public's trust in the media to get the facts right and report them in a balanced fashion is at its lowest "in more than two decades of Pew Research surveys, and Americans’ views of media bias and independence now match previous lows"? In other words, does the media narrative matter when said media's audience doesn't think they're shooting straight OR speaking the truth?