Daily Archives: November 9, 2009

scott

tuck

Surely the facts are not in dispute. . .save for the pundits of Pravda

Silver Spring, MD: I wonder if you two could help me. As you likely know, two tragic shooting rampages happened last Thursday. Our media did an obsessively thorough job of telling me the first one was done by a Muslim, but none of the stories about Mr. Rodriquez, the Florida shooter, informed me of HIS religion. Since I desperately need to know which faiths attract dangerous, bloodthirsty animals so that I can stereotype and steer clear of them, I am left high and dry by the latter coverage. I’m assuming Rodriquez was a Christian (as was Mr. Cho of Virginia Tech), but the media is terminally shy when it comes to even mentioning if a shooter is “Christian”. How can I know whom to fear and hate when the media is so spotty in its bogeymongering?

Ana Marie Cox: Well, you are in a pickle, aren’t you! I think you could save a lot of time and just start being scared everyone — a lonely but safe existence, OR you could not assume that the media has the best judgment when it comes to relevant details.

Also, why aren’t more crazy people Zoroastrians? Not that I want to imply that there’s anything crazy (relatively speaking!) about Zoroastrainism, but man does it SOUND scary. Like, just the name, you know? “Zoroaster” could be the villain in a Ghostbusters sequel or something.

Tucker Carlson: Not all religious nuts are equally dangerous. I’ve never understood why so many Americans persist in pretending otherwise.”

Oh really?

Does “Roeder” sound scary Ana Marie?

Sing us out boys and girls!