BCT Editorial – 1/2/11

According to ESPN, here’s the entire Tucker Carlson quote the editorial omitted: “I’m a Christian, I’ve made mistakes myself, I believe fervently in second chances.  But Michael Vick killed dogs, and he did [it] in a heartless and cruel way.  And I think, personally, he should’ve been executed for that.  He wasn’t, but the idea that the president of the United States would be getting behind someone who murdered dogs?”  I disagree with Mr. Carlson about executing Mr. Vick, but I agree with him about Mr. Obama’s involvement.

The editorial asked, “What’s next for Carlson?  Executing a man for stealing a loaf of bread to feed his family?”  Let me get this straight.  The Times thinks the “horrific” abusing and killing of dogs for kicks is a moral equivalent of “a man … stealing a loaf of bread to feed his family?”

Though the editorial noted Mr. Carlson is a “Fox News commentator” (Mr. Carlson was fill-in host for Sean Hannity’s TV show when he made the comment.), it failed to note Mr. Carlson also hosted shows on CNN, MSNBC, and PBS, and writes for publications like The New York Times Magazine.  Does anyone care to guess why the editorial failed to note those other associations?

The editorial concludes with “Carlson’s hyperbole represents the worst in talk radio, infotainment cable TV and the blogosphere.  Unfortunately, it has become the rule, not the exception.”  Note the editorial omitted what is commonly referred to as the mainstream media, of which the Times is a part.  Has the editorial board read any of its editorials and columns by in-house pundits J.D. Prose and Gino Piroli?  The editorial board members appear to be living in glass houses.

Finally, I continue to get a kick out of Times editorials writing about “infotainment cable TV” or something similar.  The top banner of the Times homepage says “News, Sports and Entertainment for Beaver County.”  Doesn’t that make the Times itself an “infotainment” publication?