What's with the New York Times and its inability to practice what it preaches when it comes to avoiding gun-filled images and rhetoric? A few days ago I noted how the Times had placed a bullet-riddled ad for a violent video game right on its online op-ed page.
Now comes this Times headline: "Republicans’ Budget Man Draws Fire". That is of course a metaphorical invocation of someone who by his actions invites an enemy to shoot at him. The article's subject was Republican congressman Paul Ryan, the House Budget Committee chairman and budget hawk who will be giving the GOP response to Pres. Obama's SOTU. To complete the martial metaphor, the article, by Jennifer Steinhauer and David Herszenhorn, also describes Ryan as "the Republican point man" on budget cuts. A point man is of course the soldier at the lead of a patrol, hence most likely to be shot.
Can you imagine if some Republican publication had, in these hyper-sensitive days, used such a headline about a Democrat and provided, as did the Times in the case of Ryan, a photograph of the named target?
And no, before you ask, no one at NB actually thinks the Times is fomenting violence with this sort of talk. But unlike the Gray Lady, we also extended that courtesy to Sarah Palin.
