How is it that our president can be asked by an interviewer whether or not he would drop his waiver to comply with ObamaCare and use it for himself and his family just like we do? The interviewer did not get any semblance of an answer…just silence which must have indicated that the president had no idea how to answer that question and furthermore, no desire to answer it. No doubt, he got a little bit blindsided by that one and he was miffed that it had been played on him. I suggest you get a copy of that and put it away in a vault somewhere as it is a rare occurrence of the media putting a little heat on a liberal.
The First Lady carried her daughters as “senior staff” on the manifest for the First Lady’s trip to Africa which was touted as “official business…meaning the government picks up the tab. The First Lady and her daughters were among 192 people who were transported, fed, and entertained on our tax dollar and it did not cost the Obama’s one red cent out of their pocket. By the way, that information came about because Judicial Watch sued to get it under the Freedom of Information Act. It was not volunteered by the Obamas nor was it dug up by a hard-working journalist just doing their job…those things do not happen today.
Even with this information at hand, do you think the media will take it and raise more questions about how the First Lady conducts “business” with the taxpayers’ money? Don’t hold your breath as those who populate the lame-stream media would much rather been in great favor with their anointed king, Barack Obama than to practice the journalism necessary to keep this nation free and unencumbered by the folks such as Obama and his ilk. Socialism is all the rage in the world in terms of the potential Utopia it offers. Why would a caring press want to burst that bubble for the lesser-informed in America today?
Obama, in an all too frequent moment of self-embrace, felt the need to come before the American people in light of the outcome of the Boston bombing to insinuate that the success of the law enforcement in either killing or capturing the perpetrators of this tragic act was the direct result of “his” directions to those people. Did the media question that position or raise a light to the self-promotion which the remarks insinuate? Absolutely not. The king has spoken and though he has no clothes, let’s just let it go. After all, he is a big proponent of equality and fairness in America. One can easily see that by just analyzing his wife and daughters trip to Africa.
Obama does not like scrutiny because his history is chock full of things which do not pass muster when it comes to scrutiny, it just raises more questions. The media attempted to crucify George W. Bush with the flimsy evidence of a doctored-up draft registration form presented by that media mogul, “Crazy Dan Rather”. When the evidence came to light that the form was doctored, Rather was not criticized but instead, he was recognized and given an award by his peers in the media. Is that not a bit like a group of bank-robbers giving one of their own a prize for botching his latest hold-up? Of course, the outcome is predictable, liberals don’t think, they stick together and the media was right there in the boat with Crazy Dan. If he was wrong, they were wrong thus tracks had to be covered if credibility was to be sustained.
John Kerry, our current Secretary of State, sold his military peers out in front of a Congressional Committee and spent years telling folks what a hero he was in the Vietnam War. He was a hero and his peers were heathens. When various military organizations tired of those lies, they called his hand on it publicly yet the liberal media continued to “soft-pedal” the story and caution against jumping to any conclusions regarding Kerry. Now, he is our Secretary of State telling those in Congress that they need to let the deaths in Benghazi go and move on to more important things, no trouble for Kerry to get that message on the liberal wire—none at all.
What is next? I assume that it will be the liberal lame media pouring out their emotion over Jane Fonda’s heart-warming portrayal of Nancy Reagan on the big screen. I have to wonder who devised that train-wreck and why? I cannot imagine Nancy Reagan going along with the idea except to say that she probably did so out of her respect for Jane Fonda’s father, Henry. Otherwise, Jane Fonda would be the last actress who would come to mind for the role. Of course, in the process of praising Ms. Fonda for her acting skills, the media will conveniently forget all the atrocities that Fonda carried out against our own soldiers in Vietnam as she sided with the communist mindset of that conflict and did so using her public persona. I assure you that her portrayal of Nancy Reagan will never be viewed by me regardless of how much the press clamors for us to forget the past and give Ms. Fonda her just due. Her “just due” might not be something the American public would want to view.
That darling of the liberal press, Hilary Clinton, has been anointed many times over publicly as “the smartest woman in the world”. In outstanding liberal fashion, there are no facts to support such a claim. She was touted as “record-breaking” Secretary of State yet her performance in that arena is measured only “air-miles flown” and “countries visited”. Never mind that the vast majority of her efforts were aimed at handing America over to the United Nations one piece at a time. Now, she will show up on the political scene once again in 2016 dragging that good-for-nothing dawg-in-heat husband of hers around with her. It is not that she loves him so much as it is that he is a constant public reminder of the need to connect with Ms. Clinton and offer her the pity vote. The press will be right there fanning that fire and rejoicing in the opportunity to name Hilary Clinton as the first female President of the United States. Who could be more qualified? Certainly not some “Uncle Tom” like Condi Rice.
Our younger generations get their news and opinion primarily through social networking like Facebook and Twitter. They have no use for the facts or the details…just the headlines and they had better be leaning toward “tolerance, fairness, and equality for all”. They have not been taught economics, history, or the values of a democratic society. Theirs is a heritage which will only be complete when a socialist mecca has been established which offers a liberal Utopia centered around a big government which literally guarantees equality and fairness for all, a mere function of law and perception. Never mind the Michelle Obama’s of that day with their bogus expense forms literally stealing from the American taxpayer under the guise of “official business”, a totally transparent example of “equality and fairness” in the new society of America.
As a child growing up, I felt sorry for people living under the false umbrella of communism. In the Soviet Union, they were forced to get all their news from the government agency, TASS. Only approved news could be dispersed to the people, news that kept the people in the dark and the spotlight on the feats of their self-appointed leaders. They were told that they were blessed to live in Mother Russia, in Utopia while also being told how ugly, materialistic, and distrusting the Americans really were. On that basis, I felt blessed to live in a country in which the Press (media) was an independent element and could report whatever the facts actually were. In my lifetime, that concept has been lost and the media of America is no longer the bearer of the standard of truth or the litmus test against bald-face lies in our society. It is little more than a network of socially conscious focused only on reinforcing political correctness and protecting the liberal mindset. We have come to a place in time in America where the Founding Fathers would surely shake their heads in disgust over their assumptions about a Free Press.
©Copyright WBrown2013. All Rights Reserved.