Apparently, having a baby in public is using said baby as a prop but using said baby as a ploy against the object of your political hatred is not using baby as a prop at all. Interesting logic.
I feel as queasy about this flexing of Palinite muscle as I do about the original, disgusting, asinine story. In some ways, I see a legitimate come-uppance for a tacky site that published a simply inexcusable piece of mean-spirited dreck using a child who cannot defend himself, treating him as if he were subhuman, which he most definitely isn’t. But I also recoil from mob action like this, for the impact it has on fearless free speech and the chilling effect it will have on an already cowed and defensive MSM when covering the truly tough stuff about Palin.
Do you mean this mob, birther Andrew Sullivan? Or this mob? Or this mob? Apparently mothers and fathers standing up for a special needs child is a “mob,” according to Sullivan. Birther Sullivan calls mocking a toddler “fearless free speech?” No, it’s cowardice asinine rhetoric. You cowards pick on the toddler because you’re outmatched by the child’s mother.
*UPDATE: From bcthomas on Twitter: @DLoesch Funny Sullivan sticks up for Wonkette’s free speech, yet in 2007 celebrated the Imus boycott/firing. http://t.co/884p8uu
Big Journalism
