That seems worth pointing out, doesn’t it? And the NYT’s story on the YouTube guy has the perfect NYT headline:
From Man Who Insulted Muhammad, No Regret
Fuming for two months in a jail cell here, [Name withheld because this is bull$#!+] has had plenty of time to reconsider the wisdom of making “Innocence of Muslims,” his crude YouTube movie trailer depicting the Prophet Muhammad as a bloodthirsty, philandering thug.
Does [he] now regret the footage? After all, it fueled deadly protests across the Islamic world and led the unlikely filmmaker to his own arrest for violating his supervised release on a fraud conviction.
Not at all. In his first public comments since his incarceration soon after the video gained international attention in September, [he] told The New York Times that he would go to great lengths to convey what he called “the actual truth” about Muhammad. “I thought, before I wrote this script,” he said, “that I should burn myself in a public square to let the American people and the people of the world know this message that I believe in.”
- No, a stupid YouTube video did not “fuel deadly protests.” The NYT knows this, and later in the story there’s the usual “some say otherwise” equivocation, but telling the truth outright would be bad for Obama.
- The self-styled Newspaper of Record just asked a guy if he regrets exercising his right to free speech.
The NYT devoted six reporters to a 2,400-word piece on a guy who made a YouTube video, based on the underlying assumption that he’s the bad guy in all this, just like Obama said. If only they cared that much about the actual murder of our ambassador to Libya, and the Obama administration’s neverending stream of lies about it.
Speaking of our moral, ethical, and intellectual betters in the media, they want you to know how racist and sexist you are for wanting them to do their jobs. As Michael A. Walsh notes:
More than two months after an Islamist attack on the American consulate in Benghazi that left four Americans dead, including US Ambassador to Libya Chris Stevens, we still don’t know what really happened that night — and, thanks to a secretive White House and an incurious Washington press corps, we probably never will. Not officially, that is…
But the questions won’t go away. Who gave the order to stand down as the consulate was under fire? Who came up with the cockamamie story — so eagerly peddled by UN Ambassador Susan Rice and other administration spokespersons right after the event — that the sacking and looting were in response to an obscure video that lampooned the origins of Islam and had been posted on You Tube for months?…
With the election safely behind him, the president and his allies are now trying to rehabilitate Ambassador Rice’s shredded reputation, cheerily tossing around the usual charges of “racism” and “sexism” as they smear conservative opposition to her potential nomination as secretary of state in the second Obama term. They’d rather not reopen the Benghazi can of worms.
For an example, see the Washington Post‘s unsigned editorial, “The GOP’s bizarre attack on Susan Rice.” Here, I’ll sum it up and spare you the trouble: “Shut up, you racist sexist.”
Remember, criticizing a black woman in a position of authority is misogyny and racism… except when the President of the United States is a Republican. Then you have a free pass to be as racist and sexist as you want. The double standard is the standard.
Four more years. And then some.