Lest we think that the media love affair with Barack Obama is a new thing, let's travel in the Wayback Machine to 2009. We had just been through the 2008 Presidential campaign where the press steadfastly refused to vet their man-god, and fellatists like Chris Matthews and the rest would have kissed his shoes, given the opportunity. Then, and now, they refuse to report on anything that might make the Obamessiah look bad.
Apparently, in 2009, The Onion had had enough. Not that they're necessarily a right-wing mouthpiece, but they have been somewhat even-handed at times. After over a year of media drooling and hero-worship of Obama, this one was a work of art.
While Obama has expressed no remorse for the grisly murders—point-blank shootings with an unregistered .38-caliber revolver—many journalists said it would be irresponsible for the press to sensationalize the story.
"There's been some debate around the office about whether we should report on this at all," Washington Post senior reporter Bill Tracy said while on assignment at a local dog show. "It's enough of a tragedy without the press jumping in and pointing fingers or, worse, exploiting the violence. Plus, we need to be sensitive to the victims' families at this time. Their loved ones were brutally, brutally murdered, after all."
Nevertheless, a small contingent of independent journalists has begun to express its disapproval and growing shock over the president's actions.
"I hate to rain on everyone's parade, but we are in the midst of an economic crisis here," political pundit Marcus Reid said. "Why was our president ritualistically dismembering the corpses of his prey when he should have been working on a new tax proposal for small businesses? I, for one, am outraged."
The New York Times newsroom is reportedly still undecided on whether or not to print a recent letter received from Obama, in which the president threatens to kill another helpless citizen every Tuesday and "fill [his] heavenly palace with slaves for the afterlife" unless the police "stop the darkness from screaming."
"President Obama's letter presents us with a classic journalistic quandary," executive editor Bill Keller said. "If we print it, then we're giving him control over the kinds of stories we choose to run. It would be an acknowledgment that we somehow give the nation's commander in chief special treatment."
And here's hoping the presstitutes are listening to this recent Onion masterpiece on Paul Ryan.
It’s okay to admit it. You’re frightened to death of me. It might actually be healthy for you to face your fears now rather than later, when Mitt and I are leading by a few points in the polls and it looks like this thing might end badly for you. Face it: I’m not some catastrophe waiting to happen, like a Sarah Palin or a Dan Quayle. On the contrary, you have the exact opposite fear. I’m a solid, competent, some might say exceptional, politician.
Did you get nervous when you read that last sentence? Is it because you know in your heart of hearts that it’s 100 percent true? Is it because, even if you strongly disagree with my beliefs on Medicare, Social Security, women’s rights, and marriage equality, you know my talent as a speaker and my well-thought-out approach to these issues—no matter how radical and convoluted you find them—might just be enough to win over independent voters?
Do you get chills just thinking about how strong my appeal actually is?
I have another question for you: How scared are you that I can convince people I’m right? Because I’m good at it. No, I’m really good at it. You see, I know how to turn up the charm and charisma without putting people off. Then I back up what I’m saying with arguments that, when they come out of my mouth, sound completely accurate and well-reasoned. And I do it with such passion that people automatically recognize me as a man with deep convictions he will stand up for, no matter what.
The American people love that s**t. They love it.
I'm pretty sure I've posted that one before, but it's worth another read. It'll make your Saturday a bit brighter.
UPDATE: What WON'T make your Saturday brighter is this story, again regarding the incestuous relationship between the leftist press and the Obama administration.
Senate Republicans are furious the Obama administration rebuffed their attempts to learn details of the Benghazi attack, only to give the coveted information to The New York Times and The Wall Street Journal.
Senators say they were rebuffed by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton when they pressed for more information about the attack that killed U.S. envoy Christopher Stephens in Libya.
“That is the most useless, worthless briefing I have attended in a long time,” Sen. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.) told reporters after the closed-door session.
GOP lawmakers were incensed to find many of the details they tried to learn Thursday were in a front-page article in The Times the following morning.
Senator Wicker (R-MS) gets it right:
Sen. Roger Wicker (R-Miss.) said the media has helped Obama by not focusing enough on the nation’s sluggish economy and $16 trillion debt.
“The president of the United States is doing everything he can to change the subject from that real central issue of our faltering economy and yes, the mainstream media is out there playing trivial pursuit and talking about everything that is not important and that is a distraction,” Wicker said on the Senate floor Friday.
This is an OPEN THREAD. Post on whatever you want...but I'll take as much media bashing as you can dish...