John O’Sullivan notes that “If we had to rely on the U.S. government and major news media for enlightenment, we would be utterly mystified as to why John Muhammad and John Malvo allegedly went on a killing spree. They are pretty sure that it has nothing to do with Islam or illegal immigration. Aside from that they are baffled.” O’Sullivan points out that there never was any evidence to support the “angry white male” profile, and that three columnists–Michelle Malkin, Andrew Sullivan and Mark Steyn–provided more reliable information and sounder analysis than the entire mainstream media. Why? Because “they were not wearing ideological blinders when they looked at [the] facts.” O’Sullivan concludes that Sullivan, Steyn and Malkin demonstrate that “reporting is too important to be left to the reporters,” a sentiment that will meet with no objection in the blogosphere.
Most Read on Power Line
- Standoff at Bundy Ranch Ends, With Photo of the Year So Far
- Why You Should Be Sympathetic Toward Cliven Bundy
- Lilly Ledbetter and the lie that will not die
- The Hillary-Boeing-Russia triangle
- Is Scott Walker on his way to 2016 front-runner status?
- Balancing Act: The Democrats' Ideology Versus Reality
Subscribe to Power Line by Email
Find us on Facebook
“Arise and take our stand for freedom as in the olden time.” Winston Churchill
“Proclaim Liberty throughout All the land unto All the Inhabitants Thereof.” Inscription on the Liberty Bell