I honestly tried to find a photo of Vincent Carroll - a stalwart "conservative" editorial writer at the Denver Post - in which he doesn't appear to be crazy, but this proved to be a futile pursuit.His politics: "Vince Carroll (just slightly to the left of Mussolini)"http://smirkingchimp.com/thread/9864Carroll's Opinion-Formation Modus OperandiAs a conservative, Carroll must manipulate readers of the Denver Post editorial pages. For some reason, all right-wing writers feel that this is their blessed mandate on earth.Attacking ethics group, Post's Carroll failed to disclose key facts and his own past criticism of Coffman in ethics case
Carroll takes the Same Lack of Integrity to his Denver Post commentaries on 9/11. From "Public TV and 9/11," by Vincent Carroll, 09/26/2009:
The propagandists are getting lazy. More and more often, they don't bother to refute - they simply quote a liberal ne'er-do-well as if hanging the poor, dumb beast by his own petard and leave it at that. 9/11 was a direct pretext for invading Iraq. 9/11 was the direct pretext for hurried passage of the Patriot Act. No one says otherwise. But Carroll does, presumably, though he doesn't quibble, just leaves the opposition to twist in the wind. Clever (?) ...
This is not a very ambitious Truther debunking. It's rather childish, lazy. Some state propagandists in the military-corporate press are masters of their craft. They go to great lengths to crucify their victims in the 9/11 Truth Movement, bone up on the obscure scientific forensics, comb over and quote complicated federal reports and engineering papers, concoct ingenious arguments that appear to make mince-meat of the Truthers. Not Carroll. Where is his conservative drive to crush all resistance?He has other right-wing axes to grind, of course. (The problem is, he's not so good at it. I found, with a Google search, that his readers repeatedly refer to him as a "propagandist.") He doesn't only spit on 9/11 Truthers. Carroll has also advanced global warming talking points that happen to be identical to the energy industry's. His main source, as it happens, is a CIA/military intelligence front - the American Enterprise Institute. A critic of Carroll observes that he "completely ignores sources like the McKinsey Global Institute and the International Energy Agency .... Vincent Carroll wrote an op-ed piece in the Denver Post yesterday: Carbon cutting pipe dreams. Someone's smoking a pipe... Using tortured logic and forming an argument around industry-approved talking points has long been a mainstay of the way Cons approach any number of policy topics. ... Carroll's citation of reduction of personal freedom is a strawman. Rather than address the subject at hand, he retreats back to a common complaint Cons make of liberal policies. ... Carroll's version of reality is too heavily biased by extremist do-nothings who profiteer from the rest of us. Ignoring easily accessible non-partisan energy research by reputable outfits is among the least of his faults. It must be nice to have a gig where fact-checking is optional. ..."(See: http://www.squarestate.net/diary/8157/vincent-carroll-repeats-tired-climate-change-talking-points)But fact-checking is work - and this is the profile of a shiftless writer. Facts don't seem to be Carroll's concern. He'd rather shape opinions with small effort and take the rest of the day off, evidently.