Fox News, MSNBC Biased Yesterday, Must Be Accurate Today, Insist Americans

I find it fascinating that half of Americans scoff at Fox News as a source for slanted, distorted news and outright lies while the other half of Americans scoff at MSNBC as a source of slanted, distorted

Each half of America is sure the other half of America has it wrong.
Courtesy Hard Rock Libertarians.

news and outright lies. Yet the half of Americans that yesterday scoffed at Fox News today believes its coverage of the alleged mail bombs to be basically accurate, correct and reported with some newly found journalistic integrity. And the half of Americans that yesterday scoffed at MSNBC today believes its coverage of the alleged mail bombs to be basically accurate, correct and reported with some newly found journalistic integrity. The only real difference is in how they assign blame to one side or the other side. 

Why the sudden acceptance that what's shown on TV today must now be the truth when just hours earlier people were so sure the TV news was feeding them almost nothing but outright lies?

UPDATE: Squirrel Hill

And now the Squirrel Hill shooting. This story is so emotionally disturbing that the media must be reporting it truthfully. The media may be slanting, distorting and lying about almost everything else - but not this story. The reporting on Squirrel Hill synagogue must be accurate...and the mail bombs - accurate. It's everything else that is slanted, distorted or a lie. And Pulse Nightclub. The reporting on Squirrel Hill, the mail bombs and Pulse Nightclub is 100% accurate. Except for those stories, all other news coverage is slanted, distorted or a lie. Oh, and except for the Las Vegas shooting - there were no holes in the reporting for the Vegas shooting. And the migrant caravans - biased news coverage. Except for those stories, everything else shown on the TV news must be accurate, correct and reported with journalistic integrity...

Follow @PaulEntin

Less Civility, More Hostility?

The cry for civility among the political class following the attempt on Rep. Gabrielle Giffords' life is a sign of fear poking through their arrogance and disdain for the American people. Sure, Jared Lee Loughner is mentally ill but that a member of Congress was the object of his anger is not being dismissed in Washington D.C. But I don’t buy in to these calls for civility. They are, in fact, thinly veiled pleas to leave other political officials alone, to leave them be to pilfer in peace, wantonly waste and blatantly bilk Americans of their money, rights and freedom.

It’s not very different than a thug on the street stealing your wallet and then scolding you for reacting without civility.

Congressmen routinely carried guns to work in the mid-1800's for self-defense. After all, you never know when a debate will lose its civility. Only the unprecedented prosperity and security of 20th century America made arming political officials unnecessary to the point that we snicker at the thought. Now that both prosperity and security are in question and the primary causes of this turmoil are easily seen in policy directives from Washington, it is perfectly logical that the political class would become targets of anger. Their fear of a Jeffersonian revolution seems to be growing. Do they understand their policies must lead to tough times and unrest? Or do they think unrest is but a symptom of tough times?

Go ahead and plead for civility. Until the political class feels nervous enough to carry there is a far greater need for lawful citizen action, a far greater need for hostility* than civility.

*By hostility, the author refers merely to the tone of policy discussions. This is in no way intended to incite a little rebellion.
Follow @PaulEntin