Where is the Media Campaign Against the Left-Inspired “Climate of Hate?”

American Thinker contributor Thomas Lifson writes of the shooting of Congressman Steve Scalise:

It was approximately two hours after Rep. Gabrielle Giffords was shot in Tucson, Ariz. by Jared Loughner, an insane man, that the left media began a campaign against the "climate of hate" allegedly fostered by, in particular, Sarah Palin. Remember the crosshairs on a map of districts targeted for GOP wins?

With the cultural grandees of New York indulging in theatrical renditions of President Trump being bloodily stabbed, there is certainly a climate of hate now. It is time for a little reflection on their part. If it turns out that the shooter was inspired by the political hate of the left, this could be a turning point in the national mood. (Excerpt)

There's little doubt that the shooter, James Hodgkinson, had been inspired by the “political hate of the left.” A dedicated Bernie Sanders supporter, according to the UK Telegraph, “Hodgkinson was vociferous on social media about his dislike for Donald Trump.” Not only was Hodgkinson “on the really progressive side of things,” reports the Washington Post, he was a member of the Facebook group “Terminate the Republican Party” (which reportedly celebrated after the shootings). Hodgkinson also belonged to:

I do not like Trump, Cruz, the TeaParty! or “Hate-Radio” Damn! Damn! Damn! Expose Republican Fraud Boycott The Republican Party Liberal Democratic Socialist Party Investigation of Russian Interference in the 2016 Presidential Election I Hate Donald Trump Our Revolution Street Team Boycott the Koch Brothers Industries and Products. Healthcare & Education Berners United to Resist Trump JOIN THE OCCUPY ARMY!

The Washington Post article is brief, to the point and rails not one whit against “comedienne” Kathy Griffin for ...

No offense, but the question on the face of it is blatantly wrong.

Why would “the media” campaign against hate and violence against “the right”. They are diametrically opposed to the right and they wear it like a badge of honor. They would actively promote it themselves if they wouldn’t make themselves liable for it. So instead they tacitly cheer for it and omit covering anything that would be contrary to such a thing.

Actively campaign against what they are for?
Ridiculous notion.

Where is the Media Campaign Against the Left-Inspired “Climate of Hate?”

That's all politics.

Just like global warming, just like Black Lives Matter, just like big feminism, just like the fake hate-crimes, the nooses in public places, the fake assaults of lesbians and gays, the fake news in the media, the fake polling data, the fake racist messages written on the sales receipts of waitresses.

Just like the peace movement, just like the environmental movement, just like the "youth" movement, just like the National Organization of Women, Greenpeace, PeTA, Friends of the Earth, the Southern Poverty Law Center, etc., etc., etc. All politics, 100%. All propaganda, all fake.

Why would “the media” campaign against hate and violence against “the right”. They are diametrically opposed to the right and they wear it like a badge of honor.

“The Media” should be called by its proper name - commercial wire service journalism.
Commercial journalism has to attract an audience to survive, and the easiest way to attract an audience is to report bad news. Thus, “If it bleeds, it leads.” Consequently commercial journalism is negative - and its practitioners know that. But, also for commercial and other self-interested reasons, commercial journalists claim to be objective. I challenge you, dear reader, to come up with a better definition of “cynicism” than, “promoting the idea that negativity is objectivity.”
So, all commercial journalism tends toward cynicism. But, there is a point to be made about cynicism - nobody is cynical about everything. Journalism is cynical about society, and - concomitantly - naive about government. The opening paragraphs of Common Sense make the point that skepticism about society is the only justification for “necessary evil” - at best - of government. It follows that cynicism - the limiting case of skepticism - toward society is essentially the same thing as naïveté toward government.
This analysis begs the question of why all journalism should be so much in cahoots that it is difficult to distinguish one major journalism outlet from another. My explanation is that all major journalism outlets are in a continual virtual meeting among themselves. This “meeting” is known as the Associated Press newswire. And the theory of monopoly predicts that merely meeting together would lead people of any trade to tend to conspire against the public interest.
The cynicism/naïveté of journalism is precisely the phenomenon we see in American “liberalism.” There is no way to prove that journalism and the Democrat Party are actually independent. And if they are not independent, “Campaign Finance Reform” is a Democrat scam.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.