Good for the goose…
Good thing a few nutty anti-war protesters never broke any windows, spat on people, espoused racist ideas, or compared the president to Hitler. Or attacked government buildings. Or shot fireworks at cops.
Because if they did, surely the New York Times editorial page would have inferred that the bad apples spoiled the whole bunch.
Really, Herbert and Blow and Rich? You sound as unhinged now as Michelle Malkin did just a few years ago talking about the anti-war movement. The difference is that Malkin is a provocateur, while you’re ostensibly Serious Columnists for a Serious Newspaper.
With everything that happened in the world this week — from the 
UK budget, to the Greek bailout, to Venezuela’s continued crackdown on dissent — the best you can do is all write the same column asserting that because a few crackers behave poorly at a Tea Party rally that everyone concerned about fiscal policy is racist?
It was obnoxious when right-wing provocateurs took a few examples of puerile or offensive behavior by anti-war protesters and used it to paint the entire (amorphous, decentralized) movement. But when the Gray Lady publishes three columns in a week using the poor behavior of a few tea party types to paint an entire (amorphous, decentralized) movement in a negative light, that borders on journalistic malpractice.
I suspect you know better, but decided it was too easy and fun to score a few quick points to avoid the temptation.
Possibly Related Posts
-
http://frontpagesearch.net/bush-hitler-unaired-tv-ad/ Bush-Hitler Unaired TV Ad | FrontPageSearch
-
http://www.bursakembang.com/phpbb/profile.php?mode=viewprofile&u=47937 Scrapebox VPS Server
-
http://searscardcom.com sears card
