Interesting that since this means so much to them they don't know the difference between communism and socialism.
He's just a laughing stock, more so when considered in light of the comment elsewhere that "deep down" we leftists know our narrative is wrong, etc. FULL COMMIE!!!
National Review? LOL The magazine has been described as "the bible of American conservatism". So you pick a biased source to show a supposed bias? LOL This is what the Huffington Post says about them " A bunch of right wing nut jobs."
Attack the message for once, not the source. How morally bankrupt can you be to condone such censorship and blatant bias?
Anti-media critiques are often absurdly one-sided. Their anti-media world is one where you whine about perceived slights to your side and conveniently ignore bad press that Democrats get. Anything that doesn't embrace the right-wing line is, by definition, biased. As Noonan puts it: "we all know." Often the Times, the bête noire of the right, runs pieces that surely should be banned by any self-respecting lefty newsroom thought police. Here's the headline from a Page One story on Apr. 17: "Disabilities Act Used By Lawyers in Flood of Suits." It detailed how fee-hungry attorneys enlist plaintiffs who haven't been harmed and then muscle small businesses into costly settlements. Yet aren't lawyers and the disabilities law sacrosanct to the left? On July 29, this story ran on the front page: "Doctor Shortage Likely to Worsen With Health Law." Aren't liberal reporters supposed to genuflect before Obamacare? And on Sept. 10, the lead story was: "Employers Say Jobs Plan Won't Lead to Hiring Spur," about the president's latest economic stimulus proposal. Why is the Times knocking its supposed hero, Obama? The violence at the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, which killed four Americans, is catnip for the media haters, who claim news outlets played down the story, the better to aid Obama. Typical is a commentary in The American Spectator's website Nov. 2, charging the media with "ignoring Benghazi." In fact, the so-called mainstream media have done tons of reporting about Benghazi. In particular, David Kirkpatrick of Times in an Oct. 15 dispatch, described the origins of the attack, which showed that local terrorists indeed mounted it, sparked by an anti-Islam video in the U.S. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/larry-light/the-rights-propaganda-vic_b_2279625.html
Excuse me? National Review said: National Review said: National Review said: National Review said: National Review said: National Review said: National Review said: National Review said: Shall we provide an equal number of biased remarks against the opposite? To paraphrase Marshal McLuhan, the source is the message.