Don't fall for the Jordan Eason propaganda

Yet another manufactured outrage, don't buy it.

I have read several Kossacks, including Kos himself, prematurely accept, or at least entertain the idea, that Jordan was out of line.

I presume that the wingnuts are full of shit until proven otherwise. I suggest you do likewise.

I have not read an actual transcript of Jordan's comments.  However, a brief tour through the LGF/Powerline/Instacracker blogghetto reveals that Jordan has subsequently explained that, in using the term "targeted", he was distinguishing killings from those of "collateral damage".  In other words, you can read Jordan's words as distinguishing the killing of journalists that occurred when the journalists were misidentified as threats from incidents were journalists were merely caught in the crossfire or incidents were ordinance went astray.

Most eyebrow-raising are the wingnuts' claims that Jordan said targeting journalists was a "matter of policy".  I am extremely skeptical that Jordan used any phrase like this.  Remember, the wingnuts repeatedly lied that Kerry accused the U.S. of committing war crimes "as a matter of policy".  Is it possible that Eason Jordan, CNN executive, has morphed into a Bush-hating, A.N.S.W.E.R.-parroting pacifist, ready to spit on U.S. troops when they return?  Sure, but why on Earth would we Kossacks seriously entertain that possibility without conclusive proof.  Why wouldn't we assume, until proven differently, that this is just "part of the pattern of Republicans accusing all critics of being unamerican"?

All available evidence is that the wingnuts are using Jordan as a punching bag to chill other journalists from being critical of the war and using the story to fire up their cult of the lobotomized into a frothing frenzy.  

How should Democrats respond?  As ever, by telling the truth?  If asked about the story, whether independantly or in contrast to Propagannon, just say, straight out, that this is what the wingnuts do.  They have a different outrage every week.  And they routinely misquote people to make their point.

Pull Brit Hume into the mix. Use the opportunity to bring up that he makes shit up to further the GOP agenda.

This is all about telling stories.  The GOP understands this. Every outrage, while new and different, furthers an underlying theme.  Here the GOP has two themes:  The Media Is Liberal and Liberals Side With The Enemy.

What story do Democrats want to tell?  What pattern do they want the public to pick up on?  What larger picture is Propagannon supposed to fit into?  How are Democrats tying Propagannon into that larger picture?  How does Eason fit in?

Democrats need to stop thinking that each news event objectively helps or hurts them.  Each story is what you make of it. Did the GOP roll over with regard to Gannon?  No, they immediately tried to make the story: Liberal Bloggers Pry Into Private Life Of Independant Journalist. They take lemons and make lemonade. Rathergate is a perfect example.  The White House successfully took a negative story about Bush being aWol and, jujitsu-like, used it to destroy Dan Rather.  

This isn't about defending Eason Jordan.  I hate CNN with a passion.  But I don't want to sit back and let the wingnuts add another data point to their theory of the Liberal MSM.  This all ties together.  If CNN is biased in favor of liberals then - damn right! - Jeff Gannon should be in the press room adding "balance".