Subscribe in a reader

Or enter your email address below to subscribe by email to the ExodusMD Blog! You'll receive notice when a new post is written.

The Media Gives Obama A Pass

  

         That our mainstream media serves at the behest of its patrons in the Democrat party has long been an acknowledged reality.  That the media openly endorses a progressive agenda and has given up any pretense to objectivity (although some feebly attempt a veneer of neutrality) is equally accepted convention. 

         The unfortunate but inevitable outcome has been any number of critical stories that have gone under-reported in the Age of Obama.

         The media, for example, became pro-war on January 20, 2009.  Oh, you didn’t know? 

         Why, since then, the media has mercifully spared the nation the front-page photos and TV depictions of gruesome death and pandemonium that had been daily staples only an administration ago - meant, of course, to portray the war as an unmitigated disaster and to discredit President Bush.

         The violence did not end, mind you, only, the media stopped covering it; with Obama enthroned, it no longer served a political purpose.         

         Likewise, the stinging op-eds and fist waving over such Bush-era foibles as Guantanamo, military tribunals, and the Patriot Act, vanished once Obama presided over the very same programs. 

         With two wars in tow, Obama chose to enter a third one in Libya, without congressional approval, and the moonstruck press went right along with him.

         The media, furthermore, collectively drooled over its "gutsy" President when he took out an unarmed Osama bin Laden in Pakistan, despite breaching that nation's sovereignty and flouting international law. 

         No, the media did an abrupt about-face regarding war and the Constitution as soon as its preferred candidate entered office.

         And there are myriad domestic and other matters that the compliant media has also glossed over or tuned out to protect its President; matters that deserve far greater examination than the press has been willing to give them.  Here are but a smattering:

            Standard and Poor and Moody’s warn they may downgrade the United States’ credit rating; the price of gas hovers at $4/gallon, double what it was when Obama took office ($1.79/gallon); food prices have skyrocketed; Obama awards Brazil permits to drill for oil in the Gulf (but not American companies) and pays them $2 billion to do it; Red China and Euro-Socialists lecture the US about spending and deficits; Obama defies federal judges in Louisiana and Florida (drilling in the Gulf, Obamacare); he rewrites bankruptcy laws during the GM and Chrysler bailouts to favor constituents (United Auto Workers) while fleecing senior creditors; Obama and Democrats state that Obamacare will reduce the deficit even as it insures an additional 31 million Americans; the International Monetary Fund announces that China will overtake the US economy in 2016; Pakistan lobbies Afghanistan President Hamid Karzai to dump the US and ally itself with China and Pakistan; Obamacare gives unconstitutional power to a small panel of "experts" known as IPAB (Independent Payment Advisory Board); the Obama administration has a plan to provide mass amnesty to some 20 million illegal immigrants; the NLRB (National Labor Relations Board) has sued to prevent Boeing from building planes in South Carolina (and adding 1000 jobs); there were only 18,000 new jobs in June 2011 (125,000 per month are needed just to keep pace with population growth); Obama hires dozens of extra-constitutional “czars”; the Department of Justice's Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives approved of the illegal purchase of nearly 2000 weapons, knowing they would wind up in the hands of Mexican drug gangs; the Chevy Volt (and Nissan "Leaf") disappoints with weak sales; the Federal Reserve launches QE II, purchasing $2 trillion in mortgage and treasury bonds, and devaluing the currency; 14 million+ Americans are out of work; Obama seeks to require companies bidding for government contracts to list political contributions; unemployment increases to 9.2%; Obama plays golf on Memorial Day; the Justice Department sues Arizona and CIA agents, but no longer defends the Defense of Marriage Act (signed into law by President Clinton);  Obama rejects Pentagon and Justice Department legal counsel that US involvement in Libya requires "War Powers" authorization from Congress; the deficit for 2011 will be $1.65 trillion; Obama quips that "...Shovel-ready was not as, uh, shovel-ready as expected...", making light of the failure of his $800 billion "stimulus" program to create jobs…

         Any of these stories under Bush would have led to heavy-handed and intense media scrutiny; a highly partisan and cynical press boring in on the President, exposing his follies, making his life miserable, challenging and attacking him, and, if possible, embarrassing him.

         Under Obama, though, there has been either cheer-leading or ... silence.  Inconsistencies papered over.  Failures and poor outcomes ignored.  Gaffes and distortions discounted. 

         The founders did not include the press in the First Amendment because of a fondness for journalists, but rather as a critical safeguard of American democracy.  It is charged with overseeing government and those in power, and to report accurately what it finds: to inquire, probe, confront, and, in particular, to detail and highlight abuses of power and misguided policy for the benefit of an informed citizenry.          

         These are tasks the media conducts in earnest when Republicans govern, but neglects with Democrats. 

         A media that took its constitutional obligations seriously would be tormenting this President over any number of issues, including war and terror, deficits and spending, disregard for the Constitution, a bewildering foreign policy, energy, Obamacare, and, of course, the faltering economy.  It would hound him on unemployment and our involvement in a third war. 

         Instead, it flatters, whitewashes, and conceals...

         An ideologic media beholden to a particular party does not serve the nation; it is not credible, nor is it legitimate...         

 

Comments

  • Harvey Chaimowitz

    July 30, 2011

    I don't know what media you're talking about. All I see on the network news and political shows is heavy criticism of Obama. Even the black talkshow hosts on NPR are slamming him for neglecting the poor and not keeping campaign promises about immigration. The only reason Bush was criticized for warmaking is Iraq and you know it, so don't lie! Everyone was in favor of the war in Afghanistan at first, but now, even Republicans are changing their tune to court their constituents. I am outraged at your ridiculous comment about killing Bin Laden. Find me one Israeli who agrees with you. And no Israelis are sympathizing with Khadaffy as you seem to do. No president has been so viciously attacked as this one is by punk Republicans. Punks are vicious bullies who pick on people for no actual reason other than some perceived vulnerability, and we know the real vulnerability with this president. He isn't all white to the racist scum you subtly appeal to and he isn't all kosher to the vicious non-sabra opportunist settlers who want to grab every inch of Arab land, no matter how much danger it causes Israel. They are not Israeli patriots, just as the teaparty here are not American patriots. Patriots put country ahead of their bank accouts. Your moaning over putting millions more Americans on health insurance shows where your heart is, down there with Goldman-Sachs and Lehman Brothers.

  • Harold Moss

    July 31, 2011

    good article, rick....wish the country would start focusing on job creation, enough of the special interest groups already!!!

  • Al Bragin

    August 4, 2011

    Rick,

    You hit it with pinpoint accuracy. It hadn't dawned on me until I read it here that we haven't seen the specific horrors of war since Obama became president.

    Many years ago when I was a local news reporter I and all of my colleagues challenged EVERYTHING we were told regardless of who our source was. We owed it to our listeners to double and triple check everything to make sure we had the facts.

    Sometime I'll tell you a story about Mayor Russell Lloyd, Sr. The story that hit the airwaves was 180 degrees out of phase from the story we expected to do. Why? Because we double-checked our facts.

    My best,
    Al

  • Al Bragin

    August 4, 2011

    Rick,

    You hit it with pinpoint accuracy. It hadn't dawned on me until I read it here that we haven't seen the specific horrors of war since Obama became president.

    Many years ago when I was a local news reporter I and all of my colleagues challenged EVERYTHING we were told regardless of who our source was. We owed it to our listeners to double and triple check everything to make sure we had the facts.

    Sometime I'll tell you a story about Mayor Russell Lloyd, Sr. The story that hit the airwaves was 180 degrees out of phase from the story we expected to do. Why? Because we double-checked our facts.

    My best,
    Al

Add Comment