Annals of career "progressive" idiocy
It's interesting to see how the right is trying to salve their conscience over what Andrew Breitbart did to Shirley Sherrod's career and reputation. Even when they acknowledge the moral imperative for Breitbart to apologize they then turn right around and say that he shouldn't under the circumstances.
Yeah, Brietbart was the guy who fired Sherrod, ruining her career and reputation!
Ya know, if Brietbart didn't exist, the career "progressives" would really have to invent him. Look! Over there! Not Obama!
NOTE A career "progressive" talking about "moral imperatives" makes me want to hurl. Go compromise away a few bucks from some elder so they can starve and then die in their own shit, why donchya.
UPDATE I almost missed this. From the same post, it seems that Booman actually has a 1984-style memory hole! Get a load of this:
If you want to radically change the way the federal government works by, say, introducing an entirely new interpretation of the Tenth Amendment, don't expect favorable or sympathetic coverage from the corporate media. But you face the same problem advocates of single-payer health care face. They're biased, but they're not biased against one side or the other so much as they're biased against radical change.
It's like the whole HCR fight -- where the White House censored single payer advocates, and career "progressives" and access bloggers imposed a news blackout on them, or banned them outright -- never happened. I feel like I'm reading the "progressive" version of the Great Soviet Encyclopedia.