Obama attacks media it doesn't like

October 21, 8:10 PMHartford Conservative ExaminerJohn Talleos

Previous Next

21 comments Subscribe

Subscribe

Get alerts when there is a new article from the Hartford Conservative Examiner. Read Examiner.com's terms of use.

Email Address   Include other special offers from Examiner.com Terms of Use

 
  During the Clinton administration writer David Brock published an article in The American Spectator magazine detailing the extra-marital behavior of president Clinton during his time as governor of Arkansas. In the article Brock mentioned a woman Clinton had made a you-got-to-be-kidding-me pass (the correct vernacular is "ewww"). Because Brock had named the woman in the article as "Paula" (Paula Jones), Ms. Jones, for whatever reason, decided to bring a lawsuit against the president. It was because of this civil trial that the country found out about Monica Lewinski and from that impeachment.

  David Brock was not regarded as a hero of investigative journalism. Unless you're a political junky you probably never heard of him. Also you may not also know that The American Spectator magazine became the first and only publication to be investigated by the justice department. So much for freedom of the press or for that matter those who defend it. If, say, a liberal magazine had brought down a Republican administration much the way The American Spectator had done to Clinton they would not only be hero's in the press but also martyrs for first amendment rights. But since it was a conservative publication and the president was liberal....

  We now have a new Democratic administration and thankfully (hopefully) he seems to be a decent guy --that is to say "decent" within the context of not being a creep towards women, which, along with freedom of the press had fallen by the wayside due to Clinton's political alignment.

  But one thing hasn't changed and that is the animosity towards news media that aren't following lock step with the rest of the liberal-friendly outlets by Democrat politicians. Earlier in the year the White House had solicited from the public anything or anyone who were critical ("fishy" they called it) of their proposed health care fix. The administration wanted to keep a database of the opposition just so they could set them straight in an honest debate, or , at least that was the official reason. Honest debate here would have been rightfully been called enemies list if it were anyone else.

  Now the Obama administration is using its resources to go after Fox News. Actually it isn't so much the news end but the conservative opinion shows. Last Sunday (10/18) White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel gave CNN its marching orders saying in an interview he doesn't want other outlets to "be led in following Fox". Obama adviser David Axelrod went further when he appeared on ABC's This Week program and instructed George Stephanopolos that the administration wasn't going to treat Fox news as a legitimate news organization and that "other news organizations like yours ought not to treat them that way".

  It isn't lost on most people that major media outlets report from a liberal-Democrat perspective. This is not to say that this is incorrect journalism. When journalist cover politics they are predisposed toward a view of governance they either favor or dislike. If two journalist, one a liberal and the other conservative, were sent to cover a political event each will come back with dissimilar aspects sprinkled with "expert opinion" that support how they interpreted the event. A political bent of a story is unavoidable.

  The problem here is the projection of impossible objectivity. Even Fox news with its advertisement of "Fair and balanced" hints at a predisposition that they are not what the other guys are. The statement alone is slanted toward their (hint hint) liberal media competition. Regardless of whether they carry it out or not they violate their mission statement right out of the box.

  What the Clinton episode and the latest tantrum from the Obama crowd demonstrated was recognition that even liberals in high places know major media outlets report favorable to their side. In the case of the Clinton years, first lady Hillary had accused the Spectator of being part of a "right-wing conspiracy" out to get her husband. Liberal journalist were quick to report "is there a right-wing conspiracy?" while conservative opinion wondered about administration paranoia. Emmanual and Axelrod are certainly cognizant of the media's liberal perspective of things, why else would they not go on their instructional tour without fear of ridicule?

  If anything this latest maneuver by the Obama team is cheap and amateur.  The important thing to remember is not whether they are right or wrong or that Fox is this or that, it's the child-like thin-skinned aspect of the mind-set that occupies the White House. Why should they care what Fox says?  Do they expect everyone to like them?