Bond’s GOP/swastika comparison still gets no MSM coverage

11 references in Google News, and still only one semi-mainstream source mentions the swastika reference: World Net Daily. Absolutely amazing.

James Taranto nails it:

Isn’t it newsworthy when the leader of a venerable organization like the NAACP engages in such over-the-top, crackpot rhetoric? (Or, if you’re an over-the-top crackpot and think Bond was right, isn’t it newsworthy that the leader of a venerable organization like the NAACP is telling the truth about the evil Chimpy W. Hitliar?)

Why did the local media ignore Bond’s crazy talk? (The speech doesn’t seem to have received any national attention outside WND and cable chat shows.) The most likely explanation, it seems to us, is that they recognized the talk as crazy and felt it would be invidious, inflammatory or both to depict a respected black leader as crazy–even though doing so would have been merely a matter of quoting his own words.

What we end up with, then, is a double message, very much like Yasser Arafat* talking peace in English while inciting hatred in Arabic–except that in this case Bond is speaking a language everyone understands, and reporters, whose job is to report the facts, are instead concealing them. Bond’s mostly black audience at Fayetteville hears his message of division and resentment, while the broader public is told that he has a “positive attitude” and is engaged in a “fight for equal rights.”


Move along …. nothin’ here to see.

Update: Oh, but when Sec. of Defense Donald Rumsfeld compares Cindy Sheehan’s new pal Hugo Chavez (Venezuelan dictator) to Hitler, it makes news at the Associated Press and gets posted at MSNBC (for starters). And look at all the articles where this comparison was noted.

Double standard? Nah. Of course not!

The blogosphere is abuzz on this story. Mark in Mexico has a huge link roundup of blogger commentary on Bond’s swastika slur.

Related Toldjah So posts:

Comments are closed.