Media coverage of the Congressional threats

If you want to know why the news coverage (not the editorial page) of the Wall Street Journal has a reputation for being the most liberal newspaper in the country, just read journalist Naftali Bendavid's account of . . . just about anything political. Today's piece on the charges being thrown back and forth about threats is a good example.

"Democrats seized on the reported violence to portray opponents as irresponsible. Republicans condemning the acts, charged Democrats with trying to make political hay."

I'd say that's true--but words matter. Notice, she doesn't say who the irresponsible opponents are. We're left to conclude they are Republicans, which is exactly what the Democrats have said, with zero proof--some even demanding apologies. Naftali is much smoother than crazy Chris Matthews--after all, she did a puff piece book on Rahm Emanuel and was given access to the insider's view. If you look back at what she wrote in July 2009 about the 52 Democrats opposing Obamacare, you would think they had no power to hold up this bill if not for Republicans.

You have to get to paragraph nine of Naftali's article today to learn that the Democrats have not just charged "opponents," but their Republican collegues specifically and not the progressives, socialists, or Communists who believe they had been betrayed by the Democrats with a weak bill giving concessions to insurance companies and lobbyists.

Democrats and their supporting actors in the press do not put the various crazies we've seen since Obama took office--Amy the Professorial Shooter, Stark the suicide pilot, Hasan the military doctor, or Awlaki the American Muslim cleric in their column of extremists. Oh goodness No. That wouldn't be good journalism. Wouldn't be prudent. But let a white haired, 80 year old, Tea Party participant give them the finger and they rush into the streets screaming "stranger danger" and then spend days rehashing it with Chris Matthews.

The truth is, just in case you are in the information cave called broadcast news, we have well-trained FBI and police to investigate threats of violence. Reporters and Congressmen should not be deciding who threatened whom. A nasty fax, a brick through a window and a shot fired are at opposite ends of the voilence spectrum, and so far, the Republican side of Congress is in more danger.