We have a problem in this country and it’s called not listening. It’s so much easier, and seemingly supported by cultural momentum, to jump on existing ideological band wagons.
In his Sept. 23 column, Dana Milbank followed the politically correct directives of contemporary media by misstating the position of Ben Carson when Ben was asked a ”gotcha question” by another member of the contemporary media. Ben Carson clearly stated the mandates of Sharia law and spelled out concisely how they are in contradiction to the U.S. Constitution, which is why he could not support having a Muslim leading our nation. Neither could any of us if we examined the facts.
Rather than evaluate Ben’s comments on the basis of facts, Dana used two primary “dissing tools” to demonize Ben Carson. Dana mischaracterized Ben’s position as intolerant, and accused him of “hate speech.” Dana gave the Council on American-Islamic Relations more support, quotes, and space in his column than he gave the United States Constitution.
1. If what Ben Carson said is inaccurate, where in Dana’s column does he present his argument refuting it?
2. Aren’t journalists required to do research before being published?
3. And the Everett Herald gives column space to this?
These are the three questions.
Bill Groen
Snohomish
Talk to us
> Give us your news tips.
> Send us a letter to the editor.
> More Herald contact information.