Hey, I’m just making some observations.
Considering how some of the leftist/liberals seem to like this guy, it doesn’t compute that he should be so misrepresented, but I’ve not seen the like of it before with the other popes.
With them, there was a modicum of respect.
I don’t know how non-scientific types, especially the humanities types, think. And with what I’ve seen of writing from those who allegedly have journalism degrees, you’ve got me on that one.
Seems like the journalist extrapolated what was said and came to a conclusion that was not justified.
It doesn’t make sense.
1) Journos, who a e overwhelmingly secularist and leftist, hated Benedict XVI. Tha PanzerKardinal, God's Rottweiler, the Nazi, whatever they could grab, light and throw. They can see the most potent rhetorical strategy at this point is to portray Pope Francis as "the-Anti-Benedict." Therefore they craft headlines, compose photo captions, quote and frame snippets to make him sound like a lovable fuzzball who happens to have a sex-radical bent of the wovwiest kind ("I just wuv to see the young people in wuv") as well as a kind of madcap mini-Marxist.
2) They will continue to portray him this way to dismay the faithful and encourage the Sensus Infidelium. (My term: the "Sense of the Unfaithful." )
3) Once it becomes apparent that he is NOT with their program, they will use the cumulative sense of anger, surprise and betrayal on the Left to bring him down.
I will probably stay with these conclusions until better ones emerge from the cognitive chaos of the Enemedia.
That is all! Oh, plus the JOurnos are dumb as S*&^ about anything that is genuinely of the Faith, so some of this may just be honest idiocy.