I've often said -- as has just about every other conservative with a pulse -- that the MSM is fully in the tank for Obama, protecting him from negative press and fawning all over him whenever possible (even sharing their leg shivers with us). They have now given up all pretense at objective reporting in such a way that no one can realistically deny it. The New York Times blandly reports:
Newsbusters reports the story with a bit more candor:
Their conclusion is inescapable: "Liberal bias? What liberal bias?"
So, what we have here is a difference of treatment so vast and so obvious that even my blind old dog (who was so blind that she would frequently bump into walls, and, oh yeah, also recently passed away) could see the difference. McCain has taken multiple trips to the region which barely warranted a mention in the 'other news' segment. Obama takes a trip -- his first visit in almost three years -- and he gets the top person at each of the three major networks tagging along.
Can it get any more obvious?
The McCain campaign's correct response:
So this is what it's come to. The MSM is so in the tank for Barack Obama that they're going to send their three top anchors on a trip that is nothing other than a major publicity stunt (or campaign ad, however you want to think of it) to make him look 'presidential' while he's over there. Just prepare yourself...we'll probably see wall-to-wall coverage of Obama meeting with American generals and troops, as well as Iraqis, all the while looking grave and thoughtful. He will be portrayed as having ultimate sympathy to the plight of Iraqis (maybe they'll have him give out some candy or toys to Iraqi children on the street), and shown to be sympathetic to American troops, shaking their hands and giving them hugs and appearing as supportive as their own families back home.
That sound you hear is me puking in the corner.
The truth is that Obama has not visited Iraq in almost three years (long before he announced his intentions for becoming the leader of these brave men and women), and he has never visited Afghanistan. He has been a consistent voice of defeat, seeking even now, when the war is essentially won, to implement a withdrawal plan without regard to keeping the conditions on the ground secure. He has never supported the troops, he has never supported the mission (if you ask the troops, they'll tell you that supporting their mission is supporting them), and he seeks to end the success that they have won through blood, sweat, and tears on his own politically-driven timetable rather than the circumstances of the region. He is not on their side, and not on the side of American victory, and never has been.
I know that the generals he will be meeting with have an obligation to treat him with respect, but I truly hope that not a single soldier shakes his hand or welcomes him into their presence. It would be the most powerful statement they could possibly make about his 'leadership' and support of them, one based on undeniable fact. If he was truly interested in the region, he would have visited long ago. If he truly cared about the troops, he would not have tried to direct a timeline for surrender through repeated votes in Congress. If he truly supported the troops, he would not have been talking for years about how it was a wrong war which we couldn't win.
Hazelbaker is exactly correct: this trip will be a massive attempt by his pals in the MSM to prop up his image when it comes to the war effort. They know McCain kills him in the polls on national security, so they're going to try to remedy that deficiency. They will work overtime to make him look good, thoughtful, and presidential. They will write story after story of fawning coverage, hanging on every word he utters and 'analyzing' how successful his trip was. This is truly an overseas campaign rally for Barack Obama. And oh, by the way, you the American taxpayer will be footing the bill. How's that grab you?
The MSM tank is full. They're all in for Obama, and everyone knows it. They've now just confirmed it beyond the shadow of a doubt, thus casting all future reporting about this presidential election into opinion rather than actual news.
The tank is full...and I think you know what it's full of.
There's my two cents.
Senator John McCain's trip to Iraq last March was a low-key affair: With a small retinue of reporters chasing him abroad, the NBC News anchor Brian Williams reported on Mr. McCain's visit there from New York, including it in the "in other political news" portion of his newscast.
But when Senator Barack Obama heads for Iraq and other places overseas this summer, Mr. Williams is planning to catch up with him in person, as are the other two network evening news anchors, Charles Gibson of ABC and Katie Couric of CBS, who, like Mr. Williams, are far along in discussions to interview Mr. Obama on successive nights.
Newsbusters reports the story with a bit more candor:
If the reports are true, Barack Obama has gone from Democrat presidential candidate to an out and out media star. According to the New York Times, when the junior senator from Illinois goes to Iraq in the coming weeks, all three network broadcast news anchors will go there to interview him.
This goes in stark contrast to what happened when John McCain visited Iraq last March.
I guess it's good to be Messiah.
Their conclusion is inescapable: "Liberal bias? What liberal bias?"
So, what we have here is a difference of treatment so vast and so obvious that even my blind old dog (who was so blind that she would frequently bump into walls, and, oh yeah, also recently passed away) could see the difference. McCain has taken multiple trips to the region which barely warranted a mention in the 'other news' segment. Obama takes a trip -- his first visit in almost three years -- and he gets the top person at each of the three major networks tagging along.
Can it get any more obvious?
The McCain campaign's correct response:
Mr. McCain's communications director, Jill Hazelbaker, dismissed Mr. Obama's trip as nothing more than "the first of its kind campaign rally overseas."
So this is what it's come to. The MSM is so in the tank for Barack Obama that they're going to send their three top anchors on a trip that is nothing other than a major publicity stunt (or campaign ad, however you want to think of it) to make him look 'presidential' while he's over there. Just prepare yourself...we'll probably see wall-to-wall coverage of Obama meeting with American generals and troops, as well as Iraqis, all the while looking grave and thoughtful. He will be portrayed as having ultimate sympathy to the plight of Iraqis (maybe they'll have him give out some candy or toys to Iraqi children on the street), and shown to be sympathetic to American troops, shaking their hands and giving them hugs and appearing as supportive as their own families back home.
That sound you hear is me puking in the corner.
The truth is that Obama has not visited Iraq in almost three years (long before he announced his intentions for becoming the leader of these brave men and women), and he has never visited Afghanistan. He has been a consistent voice of defeat, seeking even now, when the war is essentially won, to implement a withdrawal plan without regard to keeping the conditions on the ground secure. He has never supported the troops, he has never supported the mission (if you ask the troops, they'll tell you that supporting their mission is supporting them), and he seeks to end the success that they have won through blood, sweat, and tears on his own politically-driven timetable rather than the circumstances of the region. He is not on their side, and not on the side of American victory, and never has been.
I know that the generals he will be meeting with have an obligation to treat him with respect, but I truly hope that not a single soldier shakes his hand or welcomes him into their presence. It would be the most powerful statement they could possibly make about his 'leadership' and support of them, one based on undeniable fact. If he was truly interested in the region, he would have visited long ago. If he truly cared about the troops, he would not have tried to direct a timeline for surrender through repeated votes in Congress. If he truly supported the troops, he would not have been talking for years about how it was a wrong war which we couldn't win.
Hazelbaker is exactly correct: this trip will be a massive attempt by his pals in the MSM to prop up his image when it comes to the war effort. They know McCain kills him in the polls on national security, so they're going to try to remedy that deficiency. They will work overtime to make him look good, thoughtful, and presidential. They will write story after story of fawning coverage, hanging on every word he utters and 'analyzing' how successful his trip was. This is truly an overseas campaign rally for Barack Obama. And oh, by the way, you the American taxpayer will be footing the bill. How's that grab you?
The MSM tank is full. They're all in for Obama, and everyone knows it. They've now just confirmed it beyond the shadow of a doubt, thus casting all future reporting about this presidential election into opinion rather than actual news.
The tank is full...and I think you know what it's full of.
There's my two cents.
No comments:
Post a Comment