Are Most Media Folks Tools?

And if they are tools, whose tools are they, anyway? And what sort of tool? Are they all either sharp objects or blunt instruments, or a variety of these, assorted screwdrivers and wrenches and hammers and knives?
Which ones are the dull knives?
Most importantly, which ones, seriously, are the least likely to engage in thought before engaging in speech? Are thinking and speaking at the same time too much for the multi-tasking media, many of whom already use Drudge Report as their home page?

As to whose tools, the response to that is to ask what have they written or said lately. When they stay with the herd they are fine within their own kind. It is when they wander from home grounds that they become transformed-into open targets for the wrath of their mob. This is where some of these journalists use 'ilk' and 'hoi-polloi'

We just had the horrid murder in Aurora, Colorado of twelve innocent people and the wounding of scores more, and the 'journalists' had drawn their conclusions before the police investigation had really gotten under way. Has this happened before? Think back to the shooting in Arizona of then Rep. Gabrielle Gifford, and who these people decided had done the deed and published and spoke their conclusions, without a single fact being known? It was, to them, obviously a right-wing zealot instigated by listening to talk radio and not thinking the same way as these practitioners of journalistic malpractice. Instead, as was the case in Norway's mass shooting, we are dealing with a mental patient.

Now the Batman shooter comes, and again we have their decciding early on that a certain political bent caused this man to plot this crime for months, and then carry it out in the coldest of blood. This was a premeditated mass murder. It may well turn out to be a pre-medicated crime as well, as we look to have another individual who has lost the balance of his rationality--he is insane, he is non compos mentis and totally out of his gourd. Case in point, his mother was not completely surprised and shocked. She sounds as if she is the relative of a mental patient, and as if she has quietly wondered for a few years when something terrible might happen.

And now it has happened. And journalists show they are not investigative reporters seeking answers, but are rather proselytes of their own belief system and eager to get out the word when the first opportunity arises. Thus they malign all those who disagree with their paradigmatic view of life and opinion. They do not look back at their words, and they certainly do not retract, redact or apologize for once again getting it wrong.

The reason is that they are tools, of their agenda and belief system, and as preachers to us all, see these as teachable moments when they can help those who disagree to see things from their perspective.

But they get it so wrong, and are often so offensive in their judgment and pronouncement, that they are Tools, in the pejorative modern sense--truly obnoxious.