Please join in the Valley of the Shadow Annual Fundraiser. We are raising $7,700. Please hit the Tip Jar here to contribute. Thank you
Did you hear the news today about Tony Rezko? Senator Obama's financial sponsor in Chicago was found guilty of 16 charges. Unlike say, Abramoff (whom I met) or Lay whose ties to President Bush were almost ancillary, yet were blasted across all major news outlets 48 hours straight -- the news media is quiet on this. Why?
In the Passover ceremony, there are the four sons (Good, Wicked, Simple and one who does not understand) and it is the duty of the assembled to explain the story. So, for all those reading, this is Joseph's story, the story of a people being naively led into bondage.
First, the wise son: The Media Research Center did a study showing 90% of the press voted for President Clinton in 1992. The argument I have, if all these reporters support the Democratic candidate (blindly) in 1992 and again in 2008 (and 2004, and 2000). How would they report on any criminal wrongdoing? Answer, they won't.
I've been involved in a Political machine. You think that Chicago's machine gets it's support with Ice Cream and Milk? Because reporters won't investigate, because they are enthralled with the candidate, they become Hagiographers, not reporters. On that, my theory is, all reporters want to be the next Arthur Schlesinger, Jr. of the next Democratic administration. Schlesinger was smarter then most reporters, but he was a political hack.
The Wicked: Tim Rutten and Anderson Cooper represent two different parts of the media. Where they become a Hydra is how they use their pulpits to defend Senator Obama. Anderson Cooper has yet to defend any Conservative shibboleth against any Liberal attacks. And Rutten, he is advertising himself to be a Hagiogropher.
The Simple: GQ shut down an article that was negative about the Clintons last year. This year, Esquire sends in a hagiogropher to report on Senator Obama. Simple question: How can reporters investigate a subject they fall in love with? They can't.
For the ones who can't understand:
Just because Vanity Fair put out a negative article this year on President Clinton does not mean when a Democrat is in power they will write negative articles.
When a journalist (meaning, someone who covers both sides of an argument -- it is the partisans job to convince the public, not the press) can write that same article when the Democrat is in power, then they can say they are "speaking Truth to Power," These folks are not Journalists, they are supplicants.
As someone who was a volunteer in the Bush-Quayle 1992 campaign, and as the Hillary 2008 campaign learned now, the press chooses it's champions and they are never Conservative.