One More Example

by tristero

Riffing on dday's post on WaPo's firing of Froomkin , it is quite clear he was hired because being a "leftist" meant "criticizing George Bush." But you're no longer a leftist to WaPo if you dare criticize the Obama administration's illiberal policies: You're a dangerous anti-American extremist. That's because obviously Obama is, as they say, the most leftwing president of our lifetime. To be to the left of Obama is to be so far left, you're over way beyond Hawaii, drowning up to your commie/fascist/Islamic eyeballs in the Pacific. You don't want someone like that sullying the reputation of the august, respected Washington Post. It just won't...work [scroll to Update III].

As far as I can tell, that is the only reason - other than WH pressure, which seems unlikely - that WaPo would fire such a popular and intelligent commentator while retaining such dishonest morons as Krauthammer. I hope I don't have to explain to anyone reading this that such reasoning is nuts. Among other things, it's based on several false premises, including:

1. Obama is a liberal. He's not; he's a centrist.

2. Froomkin is a radical leftist. He's not; he's a moderate liberal.

And so, we have one more example of what acceptable public discourse is in this country. The spectrum of opinion permitted in the mass media runs the full gamut from deep maroon to dark red.

And that is why Republicans accuse Obama, of all people, of socialism. And they get away with it.