Goodman has been described as "a hardcore radical who detests both of the established major U.S. political parties." Democracy Now! is described as a "hard left radio-television talk show starring Amy Goodman" and a "Pravda of the airways." Yet, Goodman apparently receives roughly $1 million annually from Democracy Now!, which means her advocacy of the dictatorship of the proletariat is in fact an opportunistic scam.
The radical leftosphere is up in arms in sancitmonious outrage now that Goodman's charges have been dropped.
Chris Bowers basically flips a lid in describing the case as "thuggery against progressives" by a bunch of "conservative authoritarians." Hullabaloo describes this same "conservative authoritarianism" as "a vicious, fanatical nationalism." And Lyndsay Beyerstein turns up her nose in dismissal of Goodman's case: "The arrests were clearly a tactic of diversion and intimidation to keep journalists from doing their jobs."
Besides the left's utter hypocrisy over the case (the thugs are actually those folks on the street, and in the Anonymous network of anarchist hackers), Goodman herself was resisting police orders at the time of her arrest, and there's some controversy as to whether Goodman was working the demonstration as a journalist or was in fact agitating as an anti-administration protester with all the other street vandals:
Allahpundit addresses the first issue, Goodman's resistance to police authority in St. Paul:
Actually, Goodman’s crime appears to have been obstruction of justice and interfering with police in the performance of their duty ... The video makes this even more clear. They tell her twice to move back, and when she refuses to cooperate, they arrest her. The police did not “violently manhandle” her; they arrested her in the normal manner by ensuring that she was physically secured, for their own protection.Allah references Democracy Now!'s own press release, which indicates that Goodman was on the scene not as a reporter but as an advocate for Sharif Abdel Kouddous and Nicole Salazar, who were being detained. Goodman was interfering with the legitimate exercise of police authority.
Kim Tanksley, in a comment board discussing the arrest, provides this analysis of Goodman's blurring the line between journalism and radicalism:
I’m thinking Amy Goodman is wrong. You don’t go into the field where police are trying to bring a situation under control and try and talk to them about someone whom they arrested. You go down to the station and speak to an officer behind a desk. When police are handling a volatile situation they don’t have time to chat and hear your opinion. They are trying to maintain order and not get stoned, shot, beaten, etc. in the process. They have to make sure the candidates, all with targets on their backs, don’t get assassinated. I watched the Youtube video; she was in the way. When they say step back do it. Ms. Goodman’s interview was “a couple of hours” after she was arrested. That’s pretty quick to be processed and released. She is acting like a prima dona. Her statement “we are the only profession protected by the Constitution” ticked me off. Let’s take a look Ms. Goodman… it says, “Congress shall make no law ... prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; .. or the right of the people … to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” It doesn’t say you can go where you want and do what you want, when you want to do it. Being a reporter does not give you super-citizen powers.The St. Paul city attorney's office decided not to pursue misdemeanor charges of unlawful assembly against Goodman and other activists, but said journalists could still face prosecution for more serious charges.
Putting things in perspective indicates that the Goodman case is a perfect example of leftist deceit, corruption, and hypocrisy. No rights were violated, and the city's going easy on protesters who were clearly looking to provoke a backlash against police brutality (police action which in fact looks more like complete professionalism in the video footage).
Goodman wasn't "raging against the machine," she was angling to boost her own public relations and her Democracy Now! seven-figure gravy-train subsidy.