Let's buy the Washington Times a dictionary

Why should a progressive populist blog pay any attention to a right-wing scumbag rag with weak circulation numbers that was founded by a convicted tax cheat?

Because it bips.

Just joking!

The real answer is that the publication in question - the Washington Times - is now showcasing just how out of touch with reality it is. And it speaks volumes about the right-wing intelligentsia as a whole.

Today, the Washington Times ran an editorial accusing President Obama of waging a war against "independent" media.

What's the Timesies' definition of "independent"? Well, the only media organization that the Times cites as being under attack is Fox News.

Yes, the Times says Fox News is "independent" media.

Zine websites have got to be rolling on the floor in laughter over that claim!

Go look up the word 'independent' in your Merriam-Webster's, Timesies. The Last Word is independent. Fux News is as establishment as it possibly gets.

The Times also cites false statistics about Fox's popularity. Predictably, the piece accuses the White House of trying to "quash dissent" just by disagreeing with Fox's coverage.

If anyone was trying to stifle dissent, it was the Bush regime when it ordered Indymedia's servers to be raided in 2004. That was an outright assault on journalistic freedom.

What does it say about the conservative movement when the Washington Times says Fox News is "independent"? It's another illustration of how the right-wing brain trust is trying to manipulate public opinion by portraying themselves as oppressed victims.

I know that when I think of victims, I think of poor little Fox News. (That's sarcasm!)