i wish you'd left your opinions about the article first to get us started, but whatever.

the first journalist supposedly fired wasn't fired, he was suspended for 2 weeks without pay, and quit in a huff. ohnoes, that's totally the same as getting fired! and why was he suspended? for allowing an article to be printed called "52 funniest things about the upcoming death of the pope".

> two senators, a congressman and the mayor's representative attack a newspaper, and a few days later, the editor is fired.

he acts as if they're the only ones who complained. the newspaper received thousands of letters of complaint within 2 days of the article being run.

he doesn't make a single point which convinces me that the government had any influence on these journalists. everything they did seems like it would have gotten them fired anyway. the u.s. is 52% right-wing, its just capitalist damage control.

the line of his that irritates me the most is this:

> all of america is complicit in this ideological double speak

so let me try and break this down:

all americans believe that everyone fired deserved it or should have expected it.

therefore, the government fired them.

if we're all in agreement, why would we need our government to do it? wouldn't their bosses be happy to? wouldn't our tens of thousands of complaint letters help?

the author sees a house on fire, with a can of petrol and a box of matches sitting in the lawn, and somehow comes to the conclusion that a jet came by and hit it with napalm.