You know, it was bad enough when only the mouthbreathers like Ann Coulter and Michelle Malkin were raving that anyone who disagreed with George W. Bush's so-called anti-terrorism policies was a terrorist him or herself. But Brooks is a regular on The News Hour and has a regular column in the New York Times.
Why is Brooks not asking why Osama Bin Laden is still out there to even MAKE a tape of the sort we saw this past week? Why is he not asking why the president he worships allowed Bin Laden to escape at Tora Bora? Why is he not asking why Bush closed down the unit going after Bin Laden? Why is he not asking why, six years after the 9/11 attacks, the guy whom Bush first said he wanted "dead or alive", but later said "I really am not all that concerned about him" has not been apprehended?
I realize that David Brooks fears for the future of his job and of his industry because of bloggers, but that doesn't make us terrorists. One would think that with the botch Bush has made of Iraq, we'd be beyond this kind of simple jingoism that characterized political discourse in the immediate aftermath of the 9/11 attacks, particularly by a member of the so-called Serious Washington Pundit corps.
Jeff Feldman calls for PBS to fire Brooks and apologize to its viewers, citing PBS's status as "public" (no matter how much its funded and is increasingly beholden to its corporate funders), and I agree. Let Brooks go work for Fox News, where this kind of idiocy passes muster.
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire