Mainstream Media Will Do Anything To Re-Elect Obama
October 2, 2012 4 Comments
The mainstream press has spent the last four years refusing to cover any negative story about President Obama. Take the Fast and Furious scandal as an example. The mainstream press completely ignored the story while Congress was uncovering the absurdity of the entire program to say nothing of the cover up. It wasn’t until the House decided to hold Eric Holder in contempt that the mainstream press was suddenly interested and then only to attack House Republicans. By not covering Fast and Furious, the mainstream press set the GOP up to look out of control in holding Holder in contempt. To people who only get news from NBC, holding Holder in contempt looked like a rush to accuse even though the investigation was over a year old.
Univision is the first network to actually investigate the Fast and Furious program. They’ve found even more weapons headed to Mexico, to say nothing of the fact that the program extended beyond Arizona. They linked Fast and Furious weapons to the deaths of dozens of Mexican teenagers. Univision is a spanish language channel which apparently gets high ratings in the spanish speaking community. No doubt this report will hurt Obama with Hispanics. So of course the mainstream press wouldn’t want to piggyback on Univision’s story by broadcasting it to the rest of the country. The mainstream outlets remain silent on Fast and Furious.
We have a law in this country which prevents the Federal government from sending money to countries that engage in child military service. President Obama has rightly opposed child soldiers declaring it to be slavery. Unfortunately Obama has provided waivers to just about every country that we know uses child soldiers. Sudan, Libya, Congo all of the countries we know engage in this barbaric practice have received waivers and are getting American tax money or are allowed to purchase American weapons. Where is the media on this issue? Oh wait, that’s right, funding countries that have child soldiers will hurt Obama so the press has buried the story and won’t report it.
In Libya the President has lied to the American people about the cause of Ambassador Stevens death. He spent the better part of two weeks claiming it was because of some silly video no one had ever seen on You Tube. His administration later admitted it was a terrorist attack that had nothing to do with the video but the President blamed the video anyway in his UN speech. Where was the mainstream press? They didn’t show his administration disagreeing with him. They didn’t wonder what the true story was. The mainstream press continued to report the video story as though it were fact. Apparently the mainstream press is uninterested in Libya informing us of an impending attack 3 days in advance. They’re even less interested in figuring out why Stevens was in Benghazi, which is known to be a very dangerous place, without security. Exposing Obama lying to the public weeks before the election might hurt his chances, so the media remains silent.
In our lifetimes we have never seen the press as openly partisan as it is today. Even Democrat Pat Caddell is appalled by the stunts the mainstream press is pulling. What the press is doing is pretty clear. They’re burying bad news for the President to further his re-election chances. They aren’t reporting on scandals within this administration, they sure aren’t doing any investigative reporting. It takes Univision, a spanish language channel, to show the public the harm caused by Fast and Furious. None of the mainstream networks will touch the story. The networks have allowed Obama to lie about the Libya attack without even the slightest hint of questioning his story. Can you imagine them doing this to a Republican? There is little doubt that the media would jump at the chance to investigate Republican scandal, the media would do it with a certain glee in their voices. But not Obama, they’re silent.
These issues only scratch the surface of the problem. We could take about the mainstream media’s absurdly biased polls that over sample Democrats by 9-12 points on a regular basis. We can acknowledge that Obama is winning right now but why must the media go over the top with such absurdly biased polls? Worse, they not only report the polls as fact but CBS declared the race over last week. NBC manipulated video and 911 calls on the Trayvon Martin case, they took sides on what should have been a straight reporting issue. You and I can come up with dozens of other examples. Until the media just admits that they’re liberal, the charge of bias will continue. It’s time to do away with the lie that is an unbiased press. The press is biased, it’s time for everyone to admit what they are.
Thanks for the child soldiers link–good story.
A couple of questions:
If a group of angry Islamist extremists were to attack a US embassy because they were (hypothetically) offended by a youtube video, wouldn’t that still be a terrorist act?
And if Libya knew about an impending terrorist act in their own country, is it not Libya’s responsibility to do something about it? (According to the UN’s 1961 Vienna Convention, the answer is a definitive yes.)
If you want to criticize Obama’s foreign policy, there are valid points to be made–like the fact that drone strikes are creating more terrorists than they are killing. Blaming Obama for terrorist strikes abroad is grasping at straws.
If a video causes Libyans to riot, it isn’t a terrorist act. A terrorist act is planned and premeditated. If we’re going to call all riots terrorist acts, the 1991 Rodney King riot was a terrorist act and the Gunson Street, Munn Field and Final Four riots that occured at Michigan State when I was a student there were terrorist acts. It seems to me that calling riots terrorist acts extends the term terrorist to far.
What we had in Libya was something planned, which is why Libyan intelligence knew something about it three days in advance. You might be able to predict a riot (ex: I would have predicted a riot if OJ Simpson was found guilty) but predicting a riot and having information that a riot is about to happen are two different things.
I’m not blaming Obama for the terrorist attack. I’m questioning his response and I’m questioning why the media refuses to question him.
“I would have predicted a riot if OJ Simpson was found guilty.” What a disgusting racist remark! So if any black man is found guilty of a crime after a jury trial you “know” that the irrational, easily, excitable and lawless black citizens will riot. You are the creepiest piece of crap that has ever made it through law school. I hope to hell you stay far away from any minority who may actually need legal help. God help us with people like you in this world. You are living proof that abortion can sometimes prevent the most despicable of humans from ever being born. You are a truly sick and disgusting human being. Wake up! Look at what you are! You are a hate filled bigot. Is that what you want to be? Wake up to what you are and get help.
After the Rodney King verdict just a few years prior to the OJ verdict it was hardly unreasonable to suspect rioting if OJ was found guilty. The overwhelming number of blacks in this country thought he was not-guilty. Furthermore, the LA Police Department suspected exactly what I suggested, which is why they had beefed up patrols in Watts and Compton when the verdict was read. There’s nothing racist about noticing that a racially charged case could result in violence of some sort.