FLAIT

I was watching a public television newscast a couple of weeks ago and they had a report on a Congressman's town hall meeting. The anchor introducing the story, as well as the reporter covering it, used the word "controversial" in regard to the public option. What's so controversial about the public option (why wasn't George Bush's Iraq war "controversial?")?

Like all the other town hall meetings across the country, this one also featured enraged screamers and they got the bulk of the attention in this report. So by labeling the public option "controversial," and then focusing on the angry mob as if they actually had something legitimate to scream about, this supposedly liberal, government-funded, government-run, public TV network gave them credibility. And it was the public option that was made to look radical.

But the coverage this town hall received was no different from all the others. In fact, the so called "liberal" media has focused mainly on the dogmatic, bellicose, immature conservative side, while giving little or no attention to the reasonable, practical, mature liberal side (at least NBC didn't label the public option "controversial." They called it a "fetish" instead.).

Is it asking too much for the MSM to treat an extremely complicated issue like health care with the seriousness it deserves by reporting the facts in an intelligent manner?

Ask a silly question...

What's made this health care "debate" so controversial are these town hall mobs. But the way the media has reported it, you'd think it was the other way around.

So much for the "liberal" media.

But the public option isn't the only thing the media has mislabeled "controversial." ABC News labeled President Obama's speech to school children as "controversial." How is a speech by the President, telling the kids to "stay in school," controversial? It isn't. What is controversial, is the right's manufactured hostility and rage about it. That's where the "controversy" is. But leave it to the "liberal" media to give the right credibility by labeling the speech controversial, just like they did with the public option.

So let the record show that the "liberal" media continuously slanders the left and gives credibility to the extreme, radical right mob.

If there was a "liberal" media, I'd like to know where it is.