My first reaction to the Politico headline — most people’s reaction, I’m sure — was that Paul should not be elected or defeated, but institutionalized. Then I read what is actually posted there, and I saw no quote from Paul about a “staged terrorist attack.” I did see a summary by Politico blogger Dan Reilly that says Paul “clearly insinuated that the administration would not be above staging an incident to revive flagging support.”Look, Paul doesn't have a chance of winning. But he has a lot of important things to say. And, since he is not an obvious "mainstream candidate" he must be silenced by those who have better chances of winning. Many bloggers who really should know better (no links, think for yourself) are dismissing Paul out of hand and even sometimes looking for reasons to call him a crackpot because he is actually a libertarian who only called himself a Republican. And why did he do that in the first place? Because the two-party system has become such a hallowed institution that anyone who doesn't want to play that game is automatically shunned and outcast.
So I listened to the interview, trying to find what Reilly describes. And I listened to it again. And again. And I heard nothing of the sort.
Libertarians: the political lepers of America.
Read both articles linked above. I'll leave you with Freddoso's conclusion:
Paul is a barely relevant figure who has no chance in the election anyway, but you don’t need to like him to see the danger of this kind of sloppy headline-writing and summarizing. Careless reporters caused riots in the Middle East when they did a similar number on Pope Benedict XVI and his citation of Emperor Paleologus. The pope had actually given a very thoughtful and academic speech about Islamic-Christian relations, but thanks to the journalists, all hell broke loose. Other examples of this dangerous silliness abound.Via John Lott.
The media has other problems besides its liberal bias, such as the need for quick sound-bites, inaccurate summaries, and headlines that often come at the expense of getting things right.
