Archive for the ‘ Media ’ Category

Scandals? What Scandals?

I’ve spent the first three days of this week writing about history. Today, let’s look at history in the making. I sometimes wonder how I’ll ever be able to adequately cover the horrid nature of the Obama administration in one class session in my American history survey course. Students are already asking if I get to Obama in the course; I can say, for now, that I’m waiting until he’s history.

We already have seen his multiple attempts to rule unilaterally. Some have now been struck down by the Supreme Court. He always touts his constitutional expertise because he taught a constitutional law course, but let’s be honest here—he wasn’t a full-time professor, only an adjunct, and just because someone teaches a course on the Constitution, that doesn’t mean the teacher has any respect for its original wording/intent or understands its provisions:

Finals Week

He also acts as if everything is going swimmingly. Problems? What problems?

Bull in China Shop

Then when the media (or at least a segment of it) points out a major problem, he has the same old tired line about how he heard about it in the media for the first time, he’s really angry about it, and someone is going to pay a penalty for getting out of line. Then he does nothing, most of the time calling the issues phony scandals. He tries to act surprised and offended by the misdeeds of his minions in the government, but the surprise is phony, not the scandals:

Surprised Party

Our president is simply doing his best to ignore the problems, sometimes because he doesn’t see them as problems at all, and he probably orchestrated them in the first place; other times, he just doesn’t want to have to make decisions. That goes back to his time as an Illinois state senator when he earned the nickname “Senator Present,” meaning he declined to vote one way or the other.

But it’s getting impossible for him to ignore the mounting scandals, and the Republicans are salivating over the electoral prospects for this November:

Then-Now

There seems to be a new scandal each week; the administration is getting overwhelmed:

Bad Time

It would be far worse for the president if he didn’t have the lapdog media on his side:

Rip Van Media

Just imagine all the non-stop attention the media would give scandals like these if a Republican were president. Yet when any media outlet tries to hold him accountable, Obama is so used to cream puff treatment that he doesn’t know how to handle legitimate criticism:

Call Me Names

It’s well past time to put grownups back in charge.

A Select Benghazi Committee

Trey GowdyToday, the House of Representatives will vote on whether to set up a special select committee to deal with all the issues stemming from the Benghazi terrorist attack. Unless some unforeseen circumstance intervenes, this committee will finally become reality and may provide the answers that should have been forthcoming long ago. Congressman Trey Gowdy of South Carolina has been chosen by Speaker Boehner to chair the committee; he already is receiving death threats from the Tolerant Left.

Gowdy seems to be the right person for this task: he has been one of the most articulate of all the congressmen on a variety of scandals plaguing the Obama administration; he comes across as someone who won’t be intimidated and will see this through to completion. Democrats in the House have threatened not to participate on the committee, labeling it purely political. The deaths of diplomats, the tardy response to the attack, and the ensuing misrepresentation of what transpired that day in Benghazi are not political talking points; they are serious events that deserve special attention and resolution.

The Obama media has done its best to aid in the coverup. This committee is important if the average American who has no idea what’s going on is ever to be informed:

Who Is Ben

The real question is whether the administration’s lapdog media will give the investigation its due:

Page One

Some information, though, is hard to contain. The recently divulged e-mails that point to collusion within the administration to concoct the false story about an internet video being the cause of the attack have sneaked into some news outlets:

Smoking-Gun Control

There’s also a lot of mystery concerning Obama’s whereabouts while the Benghazi tragedy was unfolding. Where was he? What was he doing?

Integrity

Prepping for a debate? Getting ready for his Las Vegas fundraiser? Well, that’s all old news, isn’t it? That’s what we’re told constantly. Like, dude, that was two years ago:

Two Dozen Lies Ago

And the White House press conferences lately, with ringmaster Jay Carney, have been a real circus. At least some members of the White House press corps have decided to step up and demand answers that aren’t ridiculous. It’s been tougher for Carney the past couple weeks; what must he be thinking by now?

Please God

On the administration’s side, this entire episode has the makings of a bestseller with movie rights:

Liar Liar

Yet the Democrat theme will always be that there’s no there there—let’s just move on:

Move On

That theme is becoming overused. Hopefully, the public will see it for what it really is: a stonewall that seeks to sweep away a genuine investigation.

Stonewalling Benghazi

The Benghazi terrorist attack of September 11, 2012, might get the award for the least covered political scandal of recent times. As I’ve noted before, the ramifications of this event are far greater than anything in Watergate, yet Watergate is a household name, while Benghazi remains clouded in obscurity.

This White House pulled out all the stops from the beginning to mislead the public about the nature of the attack, sending UN ambassador Susan Rice to all the talk shows to blame it on a video. Even now, a former NSC official, Tommy Vietor, being interviewed by Fox’s Brett Baier, said, “Dude, this was two years ago!” As if that should end the story. It was actually another part of the orchestrated attempt to insinuate that this is only a Fox fantasy of some kind:

Talking Points

First of all, is “dude” really a grownup way of talking to a news reporter? But just as juvenile is Jay Carney, who refused even to acknowledge that an e-mail about Benghazi stemming from the White House that shows complicity in conjuring up the false story, isn’t an e-mail about Benghazi at all:

Benghazi E-mails

Yes, that pretty much illustrates the absurdity of the administration’s response to what Charles Krauthammer calls “the smoking gun.” Carney is a one-man stone wall:

Stonewall

Apparently, the hope at the White House is that somehow all of this can continue to be swept under the rug:

Rug

After a while, it becomes rather too difficult to ignore reality. The Obama Media—which should become the standard term for the mainstream news outlets—is horrified by the latest turn of events. They have tried so hard to avoid investigating this story:

Benghazi Coverup

Now, they’ve had to try to act as if they are interested:

Belated Reporting

But a significant segment of the media population seems willing to do almost anything to shield this president:

Coverup

It’s not just one person, though, that they are trying to protect. Another one at the center of this scandal also is in the limelight, and has much to fear from the truth:

Go Away

This is not an “old” story. This is one that cannot go away until all the facts are clearly revealed. House Speaker John Boehner has finally decided this rises to the level of a special investigative committee rather than a scattershot approach to finding the facts. Let’s hope that new committee can perform a valuable service to the American people.

The Benghazi E-mails

Benghazi AttackBenghazi is back. Big time. As it should be. All the facts about the terrorist attack that resulted in the deaths of four Americans have never been uncovered. Questions remain about a number of issues: Why was that consulate even open in a hostile environment? Why was it not adequately protected? Could our military have gotten there in time to stop the attack? How in the world did an obscure internet video become the scapegoat for the violence? How did politics play into the decision to blame the video?

Benghazi-HillaryThe Obama administration has ducked and weaved to avoid straight answers. It has gone to great lengths to shield both Obama and Hillary Clinton, the latter of whom staged her infamous response to a congressional committee with a fake outrage, yelling, “What difference at this point does it make?” when asked about her role in the tragedy.

Congress sought relevant White House e-mails about the attack last year, only to be stonewalled. It took a Freedom of Information Act request by a private organization, Judicial Watch, and a court order to force the administration to finally release those e-mails. What they reveal is revealing.

One of the e-mails is now the subject of great attention. Ben Rhodes, Deputy National Security Adviser, outlined what the official response should be. The summary is simple: blame the internet video for the violence; deflect attention from policy failures; emphasize Obama’s cool and collected leadership. All of this is in the context of the 2012 presidential campaign as the Obama people were more focused on reelection than actually conducting foreign policy and getting to the truth about the Benghazi episode.

Yesterday, White House spokesman Jay Carney tried to assert that this particular e-mail had nothing to do with Benghazi, despite the fact that it is mentioned specifically in the e-mail. His absurd answers to reporters finally doing their job after two years could be called comedic, if not for the horror of the Benghazi event itself.

This is a story that should not go away. It is far worse than Watergate, as is the IRS debacle. Yet it appears that only one network besides Fox took the time to include it in broadcasts yesterday. The New York Times didn’t think it worth the trouble either. These journalists don’t deserve any awards for their work:

Pulitzer Pies

And when the president decides to lecture other nation’s leaders on their behavior, he has no credibility:

Irresponsible Behavior

Benghazi and the IRS are open wounds that need immediate attention. They cannot and should not be ignored. Will the mainstream media do its duty for once? Not unless their feet are held to the fire. It’s time to turn up the heat.

The Obamacare Chronicles (cont.)

It’s time for my obligatory Obamacare posting of the week. Why? Two reasons. First: despite all the administration’s efforts to convince people this is a success, the horror stories on how it is affecting us continue without letup. Second: the cartoonists are still having a field day with it. And why not? It’s ripe for lampooning. For instance, the administration’s theme that enrollment is rising covers up a significant factor in any numbers they put forward:

More People

That technique will become more prevalent in the future.

Then there’s the insistence that the debate is over, and it’s time to move on. One cartoonist saw a similarity with an event in a previous administration:

Mission Accomplished

The goal, apparently, is to deny reality as long as possible:

Keep Playing

As long as the media is on the president’s side, reality will be ignored in the hope of keeping the populace ignorant. Will ignorance win out in the end? We’ll find out in November.

Return of the Phony “War on Women”

Politicians from all countries throughout all ages have lied. That’s nothing new. Neither is it unexpected. The power that comes with political position brings all latent arrogance/pride to the surface more easily perhaps than other professions. While lying is pandemic (one of the Ten Commandments forbids giving false witness), some politicians have taken the practice to a higher level.

Take the Obama administration and the Democrats as a whole, for example (you knew I was going there, right?). To what lengths are these people willing to go to maintain power? Harry Reid, on the Senate floor in the last election cycle, flatly stated that Mitt Romney hadn’t paid taxes in ten years. It was patently false, but that didn’t stop him from declaring it. President Obama refuses to acknowledge one smidgen of corruption in the IRS affair. Everyone, including the president himself, knows that’s a whopper.

One of the biggest lies promoted in the previous presidential election was that the Republicans were waging a war on women. The proof? Why, they didn’t want to pay for contraception for everyone. A “poor” Georgetown law student who would soon be a lawyer raking in more money than most people ever see, was being discriminated against.

They now have decided that’s still a winner. The phony “War on Women” has been resurrected:

Falsely Claim

Also in circulation is the discredited statistic that women only make 77 cents on the dollar compared to men. That has been debunked on both the Right and the Left; it doesn’t take into account many other factors. Yet that hasn’t stopped Obama from making it the basis of his latest accusations:

Not a Myth

It’s rather embarrassing to trumpet a war on women using this approach when one’s own White House pays women less than men. Well, change that—this administration isn’t embarrassed by anything, not even loss of credibility:

Credibility Gap

Remember when Romney made a remark about having binders full of women? Although everyone knew what he really meant by that comment, the Democrats made a joke out of it, and used it as further evidence that women were on the periphery of Republicans’ interests. Perhaps there’s a better application of that phrase now:

Binders

The hypocrisy and outright lying on this issue is so blatant, I’m sure the mainstream media will pick up on it very soon. Sure. The same media that avoided reporting Obama’s remark about having visited all 57 states is not about to start being honest now. The rest of us are the ones who have to disseminate the truth. We need to be faithful in that task.

The IRS Scandal: Worse Than Watergate

Watergate was an egregious attempt by some Nixon staffers to steal strategy intel from Democrats during the 1972 presidential campaign. If successful, it would have given the Nixon people insight into how to conduct their campaign to defeat George McGovern. It was an attempt to influence an election. For the record, it was spectacularly unsuccessful. Nothing was taken and no one who broke into the Democrat headquarters even resisted arrest.

Moreover, it was entirely unnecessary; McGovern effectively defeated himself, losing 49 states. As I tell my students, not only was the attempt to steal documents immoral, it was unbelievably stupid, as there was no way Nixon was going to lose that election. Those who carried out the deed were prosecuted, as they should have been. Nixon ended up resigning as a result of his actions to cover up what happened. His resignation also was appropriate, given his desire to obstruct justice.

Any attempt to influence an election unfairly should be viewed with the utmost concern, and anyone involved in doing so should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law. When the perpetrators of such injustice are Republicans, the media’s long knives come out. During Watergate, it was the Washington Post that led the charge.

IRSWe have a situation today that is, in fact, far worse than anything that occurred in the Watergate fiasco, yet neither the Post nor any of the mainstream media cares. The IRS targeting of conservative groups leading up to the 2012 presidential election should be garnering even more attention than Watergate did in the Nixon era.

There’s even a big difference between the two cases: the IRS was successful in its endeavor to silence those organizations prior to 2012 by harassing them with endless questions and denying or stalling their tax-exempt status applications until after the election had passed. Freedom of political speech was stifled through this unconstitutional means. And it probably had an effect on that election’s outcome.

Yet the only major news outlet bothering to report on this continuing scandal (and the coverup that has become rather obvious) is Fox. Talk radio keeps attention on it, as do various conservative websites, but the mass of the public has been kept in the dark regarding these unlawful actions.

Lois Lerner 2At the center of the controversy is Lois Lerner, the IRS official who spearheaded the stalling tactics. She has a history of trying to undermine conservatives, and her refusal to testify before Congress regarding her actions only lends credence to accusations that she did this for political purposes, perhaps at the behest of the White House. E-mails have surfaced making it clear she knew what she was doing. The House of Representatives is going forward with contempt charges, and is pressing the Justice Department to prosecute her for criminality.

The only problem is that Eric Holder continues to hold the reins as attorney general. He will ensure that any attempt at prosecution is squashed. What we have here is something far more serious than Watergate. The administration, though, feels it has no reason to worry—the media has its back.

What does this portend for conservative groups as we go forward?

Harass Our Group

Republicans need to continue to apply the pressure. Election fraud needs to be addressed. Government corruption must be exposed, even if the investigation leads to the White House. Some Democrats are declaring, in outraged tones, that this is not Watergate. They are correct: Watergate pales in comparison.