[conservatism_IS_compassion]

No competent lawyer could read Gonzales' opinion as a rebuke of "judicial activism" on the part of Justice Owen. Yet the mainstream media have consistently repeated as a "fact" the Democratic talking point that Gonzales so criticized Justice Owen. This is an extreme case of journalistic malpractice. And, without this absurd fabrication, the Democrats have nothing to justify their fiibuster of Justice Owen. Is anyone in the mainstream media paying attention to what top legal experts are telling them?

The fundamental fact is that, to "liberals", the facts don't matter. The idea around which liberalism coheres is that NOTHING actually matters but PR. Another way of putting it is that "there is no such thing as 'the long run'." That is, "in the long run" - when the chickens threaten to come to roost - we will change the subject.

Changing the subject is the fundamental propaganda power of the Establishment which is Objective Journalism^TM; what an acolyte of the Establishment said yesterday need not, as the Clinton mouthpieces used to say during the troubles (1993-2001), be "operative" today.

It's Unanimous: The Democrats Are Sliming Justice Owen
Powerline ^ | 5/12/05

[conservatism_IS_compassion]

Wendy's has offered a $100,000 reward and has said it has lost millions in sales since Ayala made the claim

And why, pray tell, did Wendy's lose all that revenue? Why, because Objective Journalism^TM hyped the story, of course!

It's far from obvious what sanction can be put on this behavior by Objective Journalism^TM, of course. First Amendment, and all that.

But the bottom line is that this is hardly the first case on record in which Objective Journalism^TM in general - and broadcast journalism in particular - has been positively detrimental to society.

And of course the First Amendment doesn't apply to broadcasting . . .

Finger Traced to Woman Who Blamed Wendy's
Yahoo News ^ | 5/13/2005 | GREG SANDOVAL/AP/a>.