Kurtz: Golly, the media have turned into an intolerant mob lately

posted at 12:01 pm on June 30, 2015 by Ed Morrissey

Some here would take issue with “lately,” but there’s no doubt now that the activism of media outlets has become impossible to ignore, especially after the orgy of media self-congratulation over the last few days. Fox’s Howard Kurtz argues that the Obergefell decision in particular has exposed the extent to which agenda journalism has permeated reporting, and not just opinion journalism. “Some journalists just come out and say it,” Kurtz notes, by saying that “there aren’t two sides in the gay marriage debate.” There are two sides, but the media is purposefully ignoring or marginalizing one side by painting it as bigotry:

I fully understand why same-sex marriage in particular is viewed as a triumph, in a country that no longer denies two people in love the right to wed. But not only was the Supreme Court divided 5 to 4, some 40 percent of the country is still opposed to gay marriage—for either personal or religious reasons–and their views should be accorded some respect.

Some journalists just come out and say it: there aren’t two sides in the gay marriage debate.

Most news organizations have so tilted their coverage in favor of the court’s ruling that you might get the impression that only an extreme few think differently.

Yet public opinion was very different when Bill Clinton signed the Defense of Marriage Act in 1996, and even when George W. Bush pushed a constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage in 2004. Barack Obama’s position until the spring of 2012 was that marriage is between a man and a woman.

Now those who still believe that are being told, in effect, that they are not just wrong but immoral.

Conservatives will find themselves amused by this belated recognition of a phenomenon that has been well documented for nearly two decades. As early as 1996, former CBS reporter Bernard Goldberg openly discussed how editorial bias and agendas were perverting journalism, at first in a Wall Street Journal essay and later in his seminal book Bias, for which I wrote an introduction in the 2014 re-release. The difference today is that journalists have stopped pretending that their news coverage takes a political point of view. Rainbow flags popped up in media outlets all weekend long, not as coverage of events but as statements by the outlets in their news sections rather than opinion, which Kurtz notes. Interestingly, Kurtz never even gets to the baldest and boldest declaration of the “one side only” declarations, the execrable PennLive/Patriot-News editorial that equated Obergefell dissent with racism and anti-Semitism, and the insincere walkback from editor John Micek.  Then again, perhaps Kurtz has too many examples to air them all out in a four-minute segment.

“Many of us [in the media] do live in a bubble,” Kurtz points out. It’s a self-imposed and self-perpetuating echo chamber of elites more than a “bubble,” which makes it sound somewhat less intentional. The worst part of this hypocrisy is the insistence, even with this blatant manipulation, that we take their reporting at face value rather than question their motives. If the mainstream media thinks that will fly, then they’re really living in a bubble.

Kurtz also misses another point, which is that the moral posturing about the opinions of their readers usually involves a heaping helping of hypocrisy. Hugh Hewitt challenged BuzzFeed editor Ben Smith about his publication’s endorsement of SSM in its news coverage as well as its opinion pieces, and asked whether Smith extended the outlet’s moral preening on other issues.

HH: Do you guys take positions, this leads me to the harder stuff for you now. Do you guys take positions on Castro being evil?

BS: You know, we, no, and this isn’t, we’re not in the position to take, like that this is often, I emailed you this before, and this is why I was initially reluctant to go on and was hiding out in Latvia, which is that when people who, when, I am sort of a connoisseur of really cringe-inducing interviews where the editor of the New York Times talks to an ideological, somebody who really cares a lot about ideology and comes across sounding really squirrely, because people who spend their time thinking about news are often kind of inarticulate on matters of ideology. It’s not the thing they’ve spent a lot of time on. They’re not that interesting in it. And instrumentally, as a journalist, it gets in the way. And so you know, and this is what I always tell our reporters. Like don’t, try not to use the word outrageous in a headline, because if something’s outrageous, the reader ought to read this thing and come away and say hey, this is outrageous, and shouldn’t need to be told. You know, we should, we cover horrific things happening in the world. We do not add paragraphs saying by the way, a mass rape by the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia was evil. That’s just not our job. We report on it.

HH: I know, but when you report, for example, on Saudi Arabia, you’re reporting on a state that refuses Christians to practice their faith. You’re reporting on a state that beheads people. You’re reporting on a state that embraces Shariah. Do you have an editorial judgment that that is an evil state? Or is that not within, is that again above your pay grade?

BS: Hugh, that’s not the business. I mean, the value that we add is the reporting, as I see it, and so that’s what we try to do.

HH: So can you articulate for me, and I get it, I think I get it, but can you articulate for me what is the different between the need to announce on LGBT equality and the need not to announce on Shariah-governed states?

[Long silence]

BS: That’s a really good question.

Be sure to read it all, because Smith comes up with a lengthy answer that entirely misses Hugh’s subtle point. The media is awfully quick to paint Americans as bigots and equivalent racists for having a heterodox opinions on same-sex marriage, but they’re pretty silent about the moral character of regimes that toss gays and lesbians off of roofs as a matter of public policy in order to maintain their supposed objectivity and sensitivity to multicultural concerns. It’s interesting to see where and when the media is willing to allow for two sides on an issue.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Kurtz can not even raise himself to the level of a useful fool.

APACHEWHOKNOWS on June 30, 2015 at 12:04 PM

Use only the word “illegal” never any nationality or country.

The “illegals should not vote”.

A lie based nation can not stand.

APACHEWHOKNOWS on June 30, 2015 at 12:06 PM

Obama is the black Bull O’Connor and he spreads his poison every time he opens his mouth.
Nice job Mr President, way to rally the country!

Privatize It on June 30, 2015 at 12:07 PM

The target is any religion except Islam.

It is not about SSM.

It is about commies, SSM, and evil out for revenge.

Obama is a lie, he lies, the msm lies for him, commie Democrats lie to get elected. Obama knows he is evil and goes after any who shine the light of truth on his evil. He is out for revenge on U S.

Lies kill.

Truth is life.

Truth remains even with no religion or churches at all.

Seek truth of die.

APACHEWHOKNOWS on June 30, 2015 at 12:11 PM

or die oops

APACHEWHOKNOWS on June 30, 2015 at 12:12 PM

Notice how the media jackalopes haven’t uttered one word about muslims, not one word, but they’re full of vinegar when it comes to Christians.

On the bright side of this partisanship is that we all know who will stand and who will cower when the collapse or attack occurs, and we can make sure to stay far away from the cowards.

Bishop on June 30, 2015 at 12:13 PM

This is why things will go badly. You have the people in power actively fighting against the people who put them there. Eventually something will break. There is an old story in China when the Legalists ruled the country with an iron fist. Almost everything was punishable by death.

A group of workers were late to their job. The leader said “Being late was punishable by death, rebellion was punishable by death. Let’s rebel!”

When you have nothing to lose and everything to gain…

txaggie on June 30, 2015 at 12:13 PM

Gee, Howie, why the fake surprise? It’s been all over the newsrooms and journalism schools for three decades, at least! Talk about your kabuki theater – the masks are off – Oh NO!

ExpressoBold on June 30, 2015 at 12:18 PM

We are used to these media jackasses trying to stir up hatred and anger towards us Conservatives and Christians and being dismissive of our views.

Hell, the New York Times will print anti Christian “art” but not anti Muslim. Surprise! Not really. Anyone surprised by that hasn’t been paying attention.

But the real danger doesn’t come from the obvious direction, which we have seen coming for decades.

The really danger comes from within our own ranks. Those who pretend to be sympathetic. The Mary Katherine Hams of the world. Who will, in one breath tell us that to oppose the supreme Court is equal to governors opposing the citizen ls united case. And in the next breath tell us how great it is Washington and Colorado have legalized weed.

People like Mary Katherine Ham are way more dangerous. Because she is the perverbial wolf in sheep’s clothing. She pretends to be on our team when in reality she is a double agent. And she convinces and confuses those who would normally want to fight.

Caution she says. The time isn’t now. Work on your own marriages. Work in your Churches and your communities. Start small. Go to back to sleep. Shhhhh, everything will be OK. Shhhhh. Back to sleep.

Baggi on June 30, 2015 at 12:20 PM

Some journalists just come out and say it: there aren’t two sides in the gay marriage debate.

Examples? Links? Nope?

Guess we’re just supposed to take the author’s word for it.

Tlaloc on June 30, 2015 at 12:20 PM

Welcome to the “Oh crap, what have we done?” awakening. Kurtz is finally getting it now that he’s older, but they’ve trained a whole new generation of “media” who’s purpose, as they see it, is not to report the news, but to endorse the narrative.

Republicans / conservatives are bad. Ask them all the hard questions.

Democrats / liberals are good. Ask them how their election has slowed the rise of the sea level.

Business is bad. Unless it’s Apple / Google / Fashion. We will ignore their mistreatment of foreign workers, so long as I get to snap-chat with my gay partner, who’s living in our 1300 sq. ft $1.4 million dollar apartment in NYC.

And make sure people understand that Climate Change is backed by science. Even though there’s been no appreciable warming since 1998, all the models are wrong, the Hockey Stick generates the same information regardless of the data set used, the NOAA is fudging climate data, and the Medieval Warming Period was made to go away by alarmists because it discounted the narrative. Oh, and proxies indicate that the Roman Optimum was a good degree warmer than it is now, and the ice caps didn’t melt. But climate change = bad. Better things get colder, crops die, polar bears grow in numbers, more people suffer, so long as Man Stops Messing With the Climate. Because, Science!

In the meantime, we’ll ignore that all humans start at conception (biology), that raising taxes hurts the economy (history), that education spending by the federal government has had no impact on exit SAT scores (math), that we all exhale CO2 so labeling it a pollutant is nonsense (chemistry), that organic living is simply the rejection of 200 years worth of advancements in agriculture and insecticides (agricultural science), and that vaccines prevent disease and death (medicine).

But man, that Neil deGrasse Tyson is pretty awesome, isn’t he? Oh, excuse me, I have to go check my Twitter account to see what George Takei has to snark about today.

Journalism!

Nethicus on June 30, 2015 at 12:23 PM

Lately?

ShainS on June 30, 2015 at 12:23 PM

Be sure to read it all, because Smith comes up with a lengthy answer that entirely misses Hugh’s subtle point. The media is awfully quick to paint Americans as bigots and equivalent racists for having a heterodox opinions on same-sex marriage, but they’re pretty silent about the moral character of regimes that toss gays and lesbians off of roofs as a matter of public policy in order to maintain their supposed objectivity and sensitivity to multicultural concerns. It’s interesting to see where and when the media is willing to allow for two sides on an issue.

That point is neither subtle nor correct. It is nothing more than “why do I get pulled over when everybody speeds!”

We focus on America for one very good reason- we’re Americans. That gives us legitimacy in criticizing that we don’t have when criticizing foreign regimes. The right of course always gets this backwards and feels more entitled to judge others than they ever do themselves.

Tlaloc on June 30, 2015 at 12:24 PM

They’ve got what they want with their vitriol and hate – now they want to put the toothpaste back into the tube.

Too late.

Skywise on June 30, 2015 at 12:25 PM

Examples? Links? Nope?

Guess we’re just supposed to take the author’s word for it.

Tlaloc on June 30, 2015 at 12:20 PM

We do not need examples provided by Howie…we see them
every day….
For those too Blind to see….alas…

ToddPA on June 30, 2015 at 12:27 PM

Notice how the media jackalopes haven’t uttered one word about muslims, not one word, but they’re full of vinegar when it comes to Christians.

On the bright side of this partisanship is that we all know who will stand and who will cower when the collapse or attack occurs, and we can make sure to stay far away from the cowards.

Bishop on June 30, 2015 at 12:13 PM

*facepalm*

How do you say this sh!t with a straight face? Since 2001 the news has been full of prejudice against muslims. They are constantly treated as all terrorists. Jeebus! Look at that idiocy about the “ground zero mosque” which wasn’t at ground zero or a mosque. It is common for news outlets to opine that muslims simple aren’t civilized enough for democracy.

Tlaloc on June 30, 2015 at 12:27 PM

BS: That’s a really good question.

And he’s not going to answer it.

Ward Cleaver on June 30, 2015 at 12:28 PM

We do not need examples provided by Howie…we see them
every day….
For those too Blind to see….alas…

ToddPA on June 30, 2015 at 12:27 PM

I’m sure you do, but you have such a need to lie to yourself that the rest of us would like objective proof.

Tlaloc on June 30, 2015 at 12:29 PM

I saw this in a comment section at Ricochet.

https://7373-presscdn-0-43-pagely.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/fbsheep.jpg

I tried to post it in a FB post. It seemed to post. When I checked back to see whom I might have triggered, it was gone. I just checked; it’s back.

BuckeyeSam on June 30, 2015 at 12:29 PM

I fully understand why same-sex marriage in particular is viewed as a triumph, in a country that no longer denies two people in love the right to wed. But not only was the Supreme Court divided 5 to 4, some 40 percent of the country is still opposed to gay marriage—for either personal or religious reasons–and their views should be accorded some respect.

If they did offer the other side respect, they would not have won. Whatever shift there has been in public opinion is because the media has presented an overall perception that there is only one “correct” position on gay marriage. If they dare allow any dissenting opinions to appear respectable them public opinion will turn.

By the way, I’m glad that he noted that it was a narrow 5-4 decision on this matter. But the media has presented the ruling as though there is a unified court opinion on this matter. As much as I hate Roe v Wade, at least the court got 7 votes, which is far more of a unified court opinion than the 5-4 vote.

antifederalist on June 30, 2015 at 12:31 PM

The right of course always gets this backwards and feels more entitled to judge others than they ever do themselves.

“*facepalm*

How do you say this sh!t with a straight face?”

F X Muldoon on June 30, 2015 at 12:31 PM

Tlaloc on June 30, 2015 at 12:27 PM

You need to work on your reading comprehension; you completely whiffed on Bishop’s point, presumably to steer the discussion elsewhere.

Thanks for playing.

BuckeyeSam on June 30, 2015 at 12:32 PM

Ben Smith got his ass handed to him in that interview. He did not come off well at all.

Throat Wobbler Mangrove on June 30, 2015 at 12:32 PM

Competition for Facebook and Twitter will help.

faraway on June 30, 2015 at 12:33 PM

How do you say this sh!t with a straight face? Since 2001 the news has been full of prejudice against muslims. They are constantly treated as all terrorists. Jeebus! Look at that idiocy about the “ground zero mosque” which wasn’t at ground zero or a mosque. It is common for news outlets to opine that muslims simple aren’t civilized enough for democracy.

Tlaloc on June 30, 2015 at 12:27 PM

So prejudice in fact, they can’t utter the “T” word.

antipc on June 30, 2015 at 12:33 PM

It is common for news outlets to opine that muslims simple aren’t civilized enough for democracy.

Tlaloc on June 30, 2015 at 12:27 PM

Examples? Links? Nope?

Guess we’re just supposed to take the author’s word for it.

ShainS on June 30, 2015 at 12:34 PM

Last time I’ll do this, but I found a musical version of Kennedy’s 5-4 opinion regarding SSM: Morris Albert’s “Feelings” (1975).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jC3JFVKJtyM

BuckeyeSam on June 30, 2015 at 12:35 PM

The worst part of this hypocrisy is the insistence, even with this blatant manipulation, that we take their reporting at face value rather than question their motives. If the mainstream media thinks that will fly, then they’re really living in a bubble.

It flies like it has wings. Few under 30 years of age think to ever question the impartiality of the liberal media.

ROCnPhilly on June 30, 2015 at 12:41 PM

I’m sure you do, but you have such a need to lie to yourself that the rest of us would like objective proof.

Tlaloc on June 30, 2015 at 12:29 PM

That is the problem with sincere beliefs. Whether it is true or not is irrelevant. Almost half of the population of the US now believes that they are not being heard and are close to being persecuted. If you have that many people all thinking the same thing citing a study will not change their opinion.

For example let’s take Fox News. Almost everyone will say it tilts to the right. How does the rest of the media treat that news organization? They treat it like a pariah or barely better then Inside Edition. Because the rest of the media establishment treats the only right-leaning news station this way it reaffirms the believe that there is liberal bias from everywhere else. If you only get your news from Fox, you will feel like the stories that matter to you are also being ridiculed and not taken seriously. If in a few months MSNBC comes out with a story that is against something you believe you would immediately discount it as bias and that it shouldn’t be trusted. This happens on both sides of the aisle.

txaggie on June 30, 2015 at 12:41 PM

I’m sure you do, but you have such a need to lie to yourself that the rest of us would like objective proof.

Tlaloc on June 30, 2015 at 12:29 PM

Yup, my Lyin Eyes deceive me!!

That’s quite alright there oh enlightened one…

You who support Rotten Pathological LIARS all day, every day,

You keep on keepin on, ya Hear? Did you get your Killary
bumper sticker yet?? Ya know, so you can support that LIAR?

ToddPA on June 30, 2015 at 12:41 PM

Competition for Facebook and Twitter will help.

faraway on June 30, 2015 at 12:33 PM

The media not using Facebook or Twitter as their sole source of opinions on topics would help. (Especially since so many Facebook and Twitter accounts are fake, frauds or plants pushing an agenda….which the media agrees with.)

albill on June 30, 2015 at 12:42 PM

*facepalm*

How do you say this sh!t with a straight face? Since 2001 the news has been full of prejudice against muslims. They are constantly treated as all terrorists. Jeebus! Look at that idiocy about the “ground zero mosque” which wasn’t at ground zero or a mosque. It is common for news outlets to opine that muslims simple aren’t civilized enough for democracy.

Tlaloc on June 30, 2015 at 12:27 PM

Agreed! The “news” has been full of such stories, coincidentally all pointing to some white or conservative or Christian guy treating the koran badly and therefore all muslims are victims and the U.S. is obviously apartheid South Africa.

Witness the latest NYT’s debacle and their excuse to cover for their bigotry that if it were directed at islam, you would have shat your Depends.

Bishop on June 30, 2015 at 12:43 PM

Tlaloc on June 30, 2015 at 12:24 PM

That is absolutely the dumbest post I’ve ever seen here. You can’t be this ignorant and still type, can you?

butch on June 30, 2015 at 12:46 PM

Obama is the black Bull O’Connor and he spreads his poison every time he opens his mouth.
Nice job Mr President, way to rally the country!
Privatize It on June 30, 2015 at 12:07 PM

Biracial.
Calling this dolezal black gives him the race card.

avi natan on June 30, 2015 at 12:46 PM

Don’t understand the Howard Kurtz hire on FNC, the man is dull.

Redstone on June 30, 2015 at 12:47 PM

It is common for news outlets to opine that muslims simple aren’t civilized enough for democracy.

Tlaloc on June 30, 2015 at 12:27 PM

80% of them want Sharia Law in the U.S. jackazz.

Try to rub a cluster of Grey Matter together to come up
with a cogent point…

Hey, ISIS is looking for a few recruits to toss gheys off
of roofs….you game??

ToddPA on June 30, 2015 at 12:50 PM

How do you say this sh!t with a straight face? Since 2001 the news has been full of prejudice against muslims. They are constantly treated as all terrorists

It might help their image a little if they stopped committing so many terrorist acts, just a thought!

Redstone on June 30, 2015 at 12:50 PM

Baggi on June 30, 2015 at 12:20 PM

Another is Steve Hayes from The Weekly Standard. I saw him on Special Report Friday, and he gave the usual line, “Although I’m a supporter of SSM, I disliked Justice Kennedy’s opinion.”

Here’s my question to every mother and father: I understand and appreciate that you love your son, but how many of you are just pining for the day to hear your son tell you that he’s dying to have his mouth or hiny on the receiving end of another guy’s thangy? If that’s not the saddest form of voluntary conduct between two males, I don’t know what is. And if they want to do so, have at it. But to put that relationship on par with the marriage of a man and a woman is nothing short of bizarre.

BuckeyeSam on June 30, 2015 at 12:50 PM

Like…

You know…

Like…

Um…

And, like, you know…

And on and on the allegedly intellectually superior roll on.

Then again, that’s why it’s a bubble: It rolls easier.

Dion on June 30, 2015 at 12:50 PM

What cavern has Howie been cowering in?

Another Drew on June 30, 2015 at 12:57 PM

Democrats have evolved from openly ruling, enslaving, discriminating, and out right detesting people based on the color of their skin. But they have a need to hate something or someone and attack it openly. So they have decided to vent this perpetual anger, hate and unhappiness on those with traditional beliefs/values and religious faith. And they don’t intend on being secretive about it.

Buckshots on June 30, 2015 at 12:57 PM

If the mainstream media thinks that will fly, then they’re really living in a bubble.

They BELIEVE it! After all, THEY are the “intellectual elite” of society.

Just ask them.

GarandFan on June 30, 2015 at 12:58 PM

Another is Steve Hayes from The Weekly Standard. I saw him on Special Report Friday, and he gave the usual line, “Although I’m a supporter of SSM, I disliked Justice Kennedy’s opinion.”

Yeah, don’t come and tell us you’re on our team and then sell us down the river on something so fundamental as the marriage of one man and one woman. Christ was very specific about this. He says marriage is the reason For created us male and female.

But, you’re going to pretend to be a conservative and try and tell us to go back to sleep?

Because that’s what these supporters of gay marriage (but hey, I’m on your side, I opposed the supreme courts filling!) Want us to believe.

Don’t buy it. They aren’t your friend. When they come for us, and they are coming for us, MKH and her ilk are going to stand there and watch you suffer and say, I strongly disagree with this!

Baggi on June 30, 2015 at 1:01 PM

The reason God created us male and female.

Stupid smart phone.

Baggi on June 30, 2015 at 1:03 PM

If Will Shakespeare were alive today, he would write:
“First thing we’ll do is kill all the journalists!”

Another Drew on June 30, 2015 at 1:05 PM

Questions. I have questions.

1) What if a Leftist writer-for-hire considered herself to be a devout Christian and believed with all her heart that God sanctions same-sex-marriage and homosexuality? Should she be forced by a would-be patron to write an opposing essay?

If not, why not? Who is she to reject providing a service to someone else simply because of her deeply-held religious convictions???

2) What if a Christian baker offers only pre-made wedding cakes and those cakes are only of a select type and style?

No variation. No personal patron-requested words written atop the cake. No ornamentation, or, at least, only ornamentation that the baker chooses and that all patrons must accept (or simply remove post-purchase); for example, two figurines — a man and a woman. No custom-made cakes – for anyone.

And what if a SSM-minded couple wants to patronize this baker’s shop, but they hate his wedding cake options? These center-of-the-universe special snowflakes want — demand! — a cake that visually celebrates their particular SSM-themed nuptials.

Should the baker be forced to custom-prepare a different cake just for these particular patrons?

Dion on June 30, 2015 at 1:07 PM

Be sure to read it all, because Smith comes up with a lengthy answer that entirely misses Hugh’s subtle point.

That’s because Ben is a hack and too many of his folks sit there and touch themselves over cat pictures.

(I love how hardly anyone pressed Ben on his dealings with Lyft).

TheMadHessian on June 30, 2015 at 1:08 PM

That point is neither subtle nor correct. It is nothing more than “why do I get pulled over when everybody speeds!”

We focus on America for one very good reason- we’re Americans. That gives us legitimacy in criticizing that we don’t have when criticizing foreign regimes. The right of course always gets this backwards and feels more entitled to judge others than they ever do themselves.

Tlaloc on June 30, 2015 at 12:24 PM

Oh, so that’s why Apple CEO Tim Cook will attack RFRA laws but still do business in Saudia Arabia?

Or why johny-come-lately LGBT Hero Barack Obama is given a pass when making bad deals with Iran?

The worst you can say about American Christians is that they don’t see a need for the state to support gay marriage by granting state benefits, but other nations actually execute gays. So maybe a sense of proportion on your part is warranted. But a sense of proportion isn’t helpful when pushing propaganda. Which is why lefties like you shamefully appropriate the black struggle for civil rights – that went from slavery to Jim Crow etc – to “marriage equality”.

gwelf on June 30, 2015 at 1:10 PM

Kurtz: Golly, the media have turned into an intolerant mob lately

What was your first clue Howard?

DinaRehn on June 30, 2015 at 1:14 PM

That point is neither subtle nor correct. It is nothing more than “why do I get pulled over when everybody speeds!”

We focus on America for one very good reason- we’re Americans. That gives us legitimacy in criticizing that we don’t have when criticizing foreign regimes. The right of course always gets this backwards and feels more entitled to judge others than they ever do themselves.

Tlaloc on June 30, 2015 at 12:24 PM

Nonsense. It’s nothing more than short-sighted incompetence. When Ben Smith answers the question about the Constitution, relative to the question of SSM, he gives away the truth.

The fact is that whether or not you “feel good” about whether your gay friends can marry should be orders of magnitude less important – especially for an alleged arbiter of truth, i.e. journalist – than the sanctity of the governing document of our Constitutional Republic.

When you answer “Well, we don’t think about that”, the truth is, YOU SHOULDN’T BE A “JOURNALIST” then.

Do you understand the hierarchy of ideas here ? On the one hand you have “feel good, aw shucks”, on the other, the legitimacy of our democratic form of government. Yeah, I can see his point of view. The hell with the Constitution, my friends Joe and Dave can get married, yay.

deadrody on June 30, 2015 at 1:38 PM

This is why I’m not a “conservative” since they’re just as hypocritical about the Christian faith I hold that they show they know virtually nothing about by their continually misrepresenting it or punting to the corruption of popery as the definitive example of a “Christian” denomination. God save us.

russedav on June 30, 2015 at 1:43 PM

On the bright side of this partisanship is that we all know who will stand and who will cower when the collapse or attack occurs, and we can make sure to stay far away from the cowards.

Bishop on June 30, 2015 at 12:13 PM

I will happily share my foxhole with a cowering liberal if an attack were to come…unless I could get my hands on some kevlar instead.

Patrick S on June 30, 2015 at 2:08 PM

HH: So can you articulate for me, and I get it, I think I get it, but can you articulate for me what is the different between the need to announce on LGBT equality and the need not to announce on Shariah-governed states?

[Long silence]

BS: That’s a really good question.

Yeah, no kidding Sherlock.

LancerDL on June 30, 2015 at 2:14 PM

Incredible how Kurtz the closet liberal bootlicker has found reason since being hired by FOX

RdLake on June 30, 2015 at 2:38 PM

The right of course always gets this backwards and feels more entitled to judge others than they ever do themselves.

Tlaloc on June 30, 2015 at 12:24 PM

Heh. When your masters round up Hotgas commenters for the reeducation camps, I look forward to hearing you squeal “No not me! I’m one of you!!!”

cornbred on June 30, 2015 at 2:41 PM

The right of course always gets this backwards and feels more entitled to judge others than they ever do themselves.

“*facepalm*

How do you say this sh!t with a straight face?”

F X Muldoon on June 30, 2015 at 12:31 PM

Maybe he says it with a gay face?

There Goes the Neighborhood on June 30, 2015 at 2:47 PM

Speaking of mobs, if Obama had a son, he’d look like this guy.

climbnjump on June 30, 2015 at 2:51 PM

HH: So can you articulate for me, and I get it, I think I get it, but can you articulate for me what is the different between the need to announce on LGBT equality and the need not to announce on Shariah-governed states?

[Long silence]

BS: That’s a really good question.

Be sure to read it all, because Smith comes up with a lengthy answer that entirely misses Hugh’s subtle point. The media is awfully quick to paint Americans as bigots and equivalent racists for having a heterodox opinions on same-sex marriage, but they’re pretty silent about the moral character of regimes that toss gays and lesbians off of roofs as a matter of public policy in order to maintain their supposed objectivity and sensitivity to multicultural concerns. It’s interesting to see where and when the media is willing to allow for two sides on an issue.

This is why things will go badly. You have the people in power actively fighting against the people who put them there. Eventually something will break. There is an old story in China when the Legalists ruled the country with an iron fist. Almost everything was punishable by death.

A group of workers were late to their job. The leader said “Being late was punishable by death, rebellion was punishable by death. Let’s rebel!”

When you have nothing to lose and everything to gain…

txaggie on June 30, 2015 at 12:13 PM

“Might as well be hung for a sheep as a lamb.”
Proverbs exist for a reason.
Aesop knows the Gods of the Copy-book Headings personally.

AesopFan on June 30, 2015 at 3:15 PM

The media is awfully quick to paint Americans as bigots and equivalent racists for having a heterodox opinions on same-sex marriage, but they’re pretty silent about the moral character of regimes that toss gays and lesbians off of roofs as a matter of public policy in order to maintain their supposed objectivity and sensitivity to multicultural concerns.

This…

snoozinglion on June 30, 2015 at 4:11 PM

Tlaloc on June 30, 2015 at 12:27 PM

Agreed! The “news” has been full of such stories, coincidentally all pointing to some white or conservative or Christian guy treating the koran badly and therefore all muslims are victims and the U.S. is obviously apartheid South Africa.

Witness the latest NYT’s debacle and their excuse to cover for their bigotry that if it were directed at islam, you would have shat your Depends.

Bishop on June 30, 2015 at 12:43 PM

Damn Lumpy(Tlaloc), I almost feel sorry for you after that one….

….almost….

tanked59 on June 30, 2015 at 6:48 PM

Ben Smith got his ass handed to him in that interview. He did not come off well at all.

Throat Wobbler Mangrove on June 30, 2015 at 12:32 PM

He came off as a perfect idiot who can’t form a coherent thought. It also notice that his initials are BS. That is too delicious.

cheeflo on June 30, 2015 at 7:26 PM

BS: You know, we, no, and this isn’t, we’re not in the position to take, like that this is often, I emailed you this before, and this is why I was initially reluctant to go on and was hiding out in Latvia, which is that when people who, when, I am sort of a connoisseur of really cringe-inducing interviews where the editor of the New York Times talks to an ideological, somebody who really cares a lot about ideology and comes across sounding really squirrely, because people who spend their time thinking about news are often kind of inarticulate on matters of ideology.

These, friends, are the musings of someone who is your intellectual better in every way.

Why are we losing to these people?

wagnert in atlanta on July 16, 2015 at 8:44 PM