Indeed. By abandoning historical journalistic ethics, the American 'liberal' press is complicit in Obama's narcissistic dictatorship.
One must wonder at the absence of rigorous background checks, the undiluted worship of the "first black president" ... of course, he is not 'black' but mixed race. Albeit one who has chosen a (for rationalists) flaccid, public, sentimentalist version of what is, logically a genetic 'mix', facilitated by a self-aggrandising 'womanising' Kenyan.
I am not American but have paid attention to Obama's rhetoric which, objectively, smacks of narcissistic, brainwashed, ideology i.e. 'black' is 'good' and 'deserving', 'whites' are the enemy. So it is that a man who preached unity has succeeded in dividing a nation into those 'entitled' without lifting a hand to earn, and those 'condemned' for effort, self-respect, and independence from state handouts.
No different in Europe. England is colonised by millions of disaffected Muslims and illegal immigrants, all supported by our taxes and granted special 'rights', privileges and exemptions which lift them above the equality principle, disadvantages the ethnic majority of hard-working whites, and confers a 'protected species' legality on minorities intent on transforming our country into a replica of the Sharia-ruled dictatorships from whence they came.
Members of the press are guided by an unquestioning belief that they should be facilitators of positive change, which aligns them with progressives and against conservatives. Obama represents the nadir of their hopes, a good looking, intelligent black man who wants the government to solve our most pressing problems. They resist any line of inquiry that jeopardizes the fulfillment of their hopes in Obama and progressivism. If these scandals cripple or break the current administration, the media will simply look for another savior incarnate.
Are you kidding me?
So you agree with the POS's life view that NOTHING is his fault!
Let's make a list of the things that ARE at fault for the incompetent one's failures.
1 - Republicans
2 - Bush
3 - His IRS Chief
4 - The Tea Party
5 - White people
6 - Unappreciative Americans
7 - Have I mentioned Bush?
8 -John Boehner and Mitch McConnell
9 - Mitt Romney's taxes
10 - Have I mentioned mean Republicans?
11 - His typical white grandmother
Etc., etc., etc.
Your article is a pile of garbage. Better buy stock in chapstick.
Whelton is only half right. Obama and crew are not and were not innocent babes in the woods led astray by a fawning and protective press. Oh no. Obama brings to the WH the Chicago mentality of politics. Look at his first run at the US Senate where his campaign somehow (!) opened sealed records of his opponents divorce record. The embarrassing revelations contained within destroyed his opponent. I can go on, but this is the same man who calls terrorist Bill Ayers his friend and used to hang Christmas balls adorned with Mao's image on the WH tree. The press laid supine with open legs for Obama, but what they could never understand or admit was that Obama would let NOTHING stand in the way of his "transforming" America, with or without them.
I'm writing a book on this subject, from the media perspective titled:
Is Journalism Finally Dead?
An Insider's Revealing Look at the White House Press Corpse.
It will make you laugh.
No accountability = TYRANNY.
Shame on the feckless LameStream Media for betraying the American people.
American voters reelected Obama, ratifying the perfidy of his first four years and authorizing another four years of more perfidy. Blame the voters, for blame mislaid encourages more malfeasance from the blame-worthy.
Don't you find it troubling that politicians and government must spend billions of dollars every two years informing voters of what's going on in their country, their government and their world? Why don't voters already know these things? Sure, the American news media is partisan and allergic to truth and fairness, but the information is out there nonetheless.
Voters who don't pay attention to current events shouldn't vote, but they do. That's America's biggest problem.
excellent article and points out the irony of how the MSM's desire to protect Obama may end up taking him down, albeit probably not impeached, but defanged (hopefully).
I agree with the overall tone of this article except you are giving Obama and his administration too much of a benefit of the doubt. This man knows exactly what he is doing. Holder knows what he is doing. It is willful, it is post-constitutional, it is dangerous. Those in the media are complicit in this. So will the media now look into election fraud, fast n furious, etc? I wont hold my breath. I will also celebrate the day the MSM is gone. Trust in the media once lost will be difficult to regain if not impossible.
Proof positive for me was when the nightly 10 o'clock news stopped its continuos tally of American deaths in Iraq the VERY DAY Obama was inaugurated. Never heard another word.
Proof positive for me was when the nightly 10 o'clock news stopped its continuos tally of American deaths in Iraq the VERY DAY Obama was inaugurated. Never heard another word.
The press is Obama's downfall? A specious concept, because obama never would have had an up-climb but for the corrupt, covering press. How can you fault them for allowing him fatal excesses once in office, when he never would have stepped near the oval office had the press done its job in '08? The man has yet to be properly vetted.
Mr. Whelton, you greatly understate the mindless and intense worship that the media has given Obama. Their relentless and pathological lies have matched his in number, arrogance, and shamlessness. And that is NOT and easy thing to do! However, you are also letting him off the hook for his unprecedented criminal corruption and malicious destructiveness. He does not get even the slightest pass, just because the media have utterly abandoned any semblance of responsibility or honesty. Would you also say that it would be the local police forces fault if you rob your local store, because they should have prevented you from committing the crime?
I see why you were a speechwriter, that is one hell of a well constructed essay.
When is it Obama's fault? Please, let's define this...the dictionary appears to be of no use here.
I suspect the Obama administration planned to use the post re-election honeymoon period to push more of their agenda. Discovering there was virtually no honeymoon period, they decided to make these scandals public as soon as possible in order to have these issues off the front page well before the 2014 election. Come election time expect them and the sycophantic media to repeat the refrain "But that is old news!"
"Members of the media, after favoring and flattering Obama for years...were stunned to discover that Obama’s Department of Justice was treating them like tarts..."
Surprise, surprise, surprise.
BO(or BB) can even turn on Party members within the Ministry of Truth to order to aggrandize his power. What's next? Chris Matthews confessing his thoughcrimes against the Anointed One? You elected Him twice--ye suckers!
@Lake Worth. A great job of regurgitating the Daily Kos memorandum points to Obama-gunsels re: "Benghazi fiasco": http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/10/18/1146612/-Benghazi-hazy-GOP-conveniently-forgets-Reagan-s-Lebanon-debacle.
You are evidently not old enough to know or remember the press corps' criticism -- not to mention late-night comedy hosts' riffs -of that funny old confused Reagan (even the old SNL, when it really was original,clever and amusing,rarely missed a scarifying Reagan set.
Thank you, Mr. Whelton. You say most precisely what many have attempted to say, but haven't quite succeeded. It's not a question of liberal versus conservative media as much as a media, both conservative and liberal and everything in-between, that is secure in its mission and practice of seeking and telling the truth on behalf of the public.
Idealistic and amazingly egotistical but, in the end, just another sophomoric media view of itself. Media outlets are, in reality, large commercial businesses providing product in the form of daily entertainment to the public. In and of itself, the media are not the guardians of our freedoms, that’s merely an individual conceit wrongly conceptualized and wrongly applied.
And our so-called Constitutional freedom of speech has become a trite excuse for say whatever you like Mr. John Q. Public – but there’s not a thing you can do to change anything within your own government, you poor deluded fool. And with everyone ranting and raving thanks to the Internet, nothing of note worth heeding is being said.
Like Pravda during the heyday of the Soviet Union, the mainstream media’s self-assigned role is to support the Politburo and the Party – the soul of the people. That comparison is brutally unflattering but more and more apt nowadays. We’re a distinctly divided nation so why wouldn’t our media be equally divided? Paul Krugman of the New York Times will attack Conservatives, then a conservative media outlet, like Fox, attacks Krugman and the NYT in turn for what he just wrote – what fun to read but of no discernible value to the Republic. Reduced to attacking each other, we’ve come to those latter days of sanity where our journalists, celebrated exclusively within their own songs and legends, resemble high school newspaper reporters, only lacking in the adult supervision provided by the school’s principal.
President Obama doesn’t aspire to a higher office and is completely untouchable during his final term – our media holds no unique controls over his actions, either now or in the future. Let’s drop the juvenile pretensions claiming our media is both independent and looking out for the public’s welfare. We buy their product, as mundane and uninspiring as it is, so an outsized ego among so-called media journalists shouldn’t be an excuse to pretend they are anything other than a commercial business and that we, the American public, are anything other than typical consumers. Mystical superhero powers aside, the media’s only role is to entertain us and, on very rare occasions, to provide information immediately vital to our health and safety.
"They hounded and harassed Sarah Palin—author Joe McGinnis even moved next door to her home—determined to destroy someone they perceived as a threat to Obama’s power."
Palin, the SNL gal.
to those criticizing Clark Whelton for allegedly excusing obama's behavior:
1) Clark is NOT letting Obama off the hook.
He is simply noting that just as a spoiled child 's misdeeds are his own, the parents' failure to set limits contributed to the problem;
2) Whelton's analysis is not only compelling, but gutsy.
How often does the public see a journalist and former speech writer for a Democratic lieutenant Governor of NY call out the mass media. This article is a tour de force by an extraordinary writer.
Poor old White boys !
The media owned by GE, Disney, Time Warner, Murdoch's News Corporation, CBS, and Viacom are sicko pro-Black anti-capitalist tools.
In a pig's eye.
And if you insist on chattering about the Benghazi fiasco, look for any mention in media that Ronald Reagan lost a total of 398 killed from four truck bombs in Lebanon in 1983. After the embassy bombing in April, letting the Marine BLT barracks get wiped out in October was inexcusable.
Obama is smart enough to avoid giving local militias target-rich environments. Losing a few people goes with the territory.
AN EXCELLANT PIECE. THANK YOU.
in skewing the news to serve "a noble cause", members of the media embraced the fallacy that drove the Obama administration: that the ends justifies the means. journalists advance the noble cause of democracy when they keep their thumbs off the scale and report the news
to sum up: Obama needs a full time minder
Seemingly apt metaphor, Mr. Whelton: whores don't get no respect in the morning. Trouble is, the mainstream editors, editorial writers, and journalists weren't Obama's stable of whores,they were gunsels or soldiers for The Don, hoping to become made men. So when the payoffs weren't delivered always and on cue, they ran the risk of getting whacked. So some were, just to send a message. Even now, the usual suspects are still in thrall to The Company, and those few who should be having second thoughts are still moderating their criticism, knowing that a whack job can come suddenly, from anywhere, from anyone.
Whelton's last paragraph, using the trite Ship of State metaphor to liken "an independent press" to a helmsman's compass, would have been apt forty and fifty years ago. Post-Watergate, with the rise of a highly politicized press corps (mostly "progressive" left-liberal),it is more like the captain's chief mate.
Dreamworks called: they want Jack Sparrow's compass back.
Excellent article. Having a complicit press is every President's dream but the reality is that it gives you enough rope to hang yourself. As for the media, they are losing public trust, as is the concept of "BIG" government. Once gone it will be a long time coming back. MSNBC is down 17% in viewership this year alone. Fox is up.
"Utter nonsense - the author makes excuses for Obama, as if it isn't his fault that the press didn't do its job - in other words, if only the press had been doing what it was supposed to do the Obama Administration would have acted differently."
Mr Davis If the media had been doing it`t job he would not have been elected in the first place !
Your piece is absolute and utter nonsense. A Prez who is misled by friends in Press would be a moron and unfit for the office of Presidency. Your attempt at making excuses for Obama's failures is the sort of pathetic sycophancy that any adult, let alone a journalist, should be embarrassed about.
B.S. - I think this story is spot on. If the media had treated Obama like any GOP President, he would have had to answer these allegations a long time ago. You need not look any further than the network news to see which Democratic operative or White House family member is leading the news.
It's time to blame the media and discredit them immediately. It will be only a matter of time when they go back to their "business as usual" and start the GOP bashing again.
About a month ago I was in DC with the kids going to the Mall . I stood on the corner with the DOJ , the IRS and the FBI all there , all on one corner . I thought just how much evil could one place hold . Little did I know
Utter nonsense - the author makes excuses for Obama, as if it isn't his fault that the press didn't do its job - in other words, if only the press had been doing what it was supposed to do the Obama Administration would have acted differently.
I guess we should expect nonsense like this from Democrats - desperate attempts to blame the media for evils committed by the Administration.
This can be predicted with utter certainty: the Democratic media will not learn a thing as a result of these scandals - their impulse will be to protect a Democratic Administration no matter what,even as they are spied upon, buillied and worse. When it comes to the issue of bias, the media will act as the media always acts when a Democratic Administration is under attack - circle the wagons and point fingers. And never, ever show a shred of sympathy for people they have been conditioned to believe are racist, sexist, gay hating, abortion prohibiting, poor people trampling wealthy tax cheaters,in other words, Republicans.
The view of the world held by the Democratic media is such that they are utterly nicapable of seeing the truth. Like those who were screaming praises for "Comrade Stalin" even as they were led to the firing squad after the purges and show trials of the 1930's, these people have been conditioned never to see things as they are. It's how Democratic politicians get away with corruption - legal and illegal - that would kill the career of any Republican doing even close to the same thing.
Accordingly, I distrust everything that's said in this article - it sounds like more excuses from another conditioned Democrat, who just can't seem to find a way to pin the blame on his party - for any malfeasance whatsoever.
If only the press had been doing its job, Obama would never have acted the way he did - pulease!
Well they did get the creepy, scheming, vindictive bastard elected and re-elected; aiding and abetting a massive damage to America; from economy to racial relations to democratic norms.
Years ago while working for an education entity, I had to provide board packets to board members. We had a very particular member who read his packet diligently, and asked sharp question. Occasionally, we had mistakes which I wanted to gloss over. My director told me something I never forgot. He said, "No every government entity needs a Mr. Blankk on their board. It keeps me honest and my career will always be okay with the truth."
Officer, you cannot ticket me for speeding on this stretch of highway because you've haven't recently policed it properly. Therefore, I'm not at fault, you're lax police work is to blame. Even as you chide the lame stream media you enable Obama by blaming someone else instead of holding him accountable. You're officially now part of the problem.
At a campaign rally in October, 2008, VP nominee Sarah Palin accused Senator Obama of "palling around with terrorists." She was referring to Obama's association with terrorist Bill Ayers, who helped start Obama's political career. The Associated Press reported that Palin's remark had a "racially tinged subtext". Ayers is white and Palin said nothing about race. Nevertheless, the AP inferred racial prejudice in Palin's remark because, to them, any criticism of Obama must reflect covert racial bigotry. But, people who live in glass houses shouldn't throw boomerangs. The public is entitled to use the AP's own standard in detecting racism, which is to say, no standard at all. If Palin's complaint about Obama's association with Ayers had a "racially tinged subtext", then no doubt the AP's objection to being spied on by the DOJ under a black Attorney General and a black President have the same racially tinged subtext.
Judging by the myriad comments made lately by our President concerning activities by his administration,he seems to know little if anything. His job description is clearly outlined in our founding documents. In the private sector he'd have been sacked long ago. My question: Why do we pay so much to protect him? I suggest replacing his current Secret Service arrangement with the Libyan militia, "February 17th Brigade", also known as the "Battling Bastards of Benghazi?" They were last seen running east. We'd get a great service for half the price.
Yes, for the last 4 1/2 years the press has been worse than useless. It has been an instrument of deceit pushing a Big Government agenda and supporting a demagogue.
Hindsight is always the best sight, but it's too bad for Americans. In the end, freedom of the press allows reporters to be lap dogs or attack dogs.
Keep trying to make the connections between President Obama and these stupid smear. The Nation laughs at you, and you are doing yourselves more harmthan good.
When you lay down with lapdogs you get up with fleas
Outstanding piece that should be posted in every newsroom in the country. When the press doesn't do its job, the American people are hurt, and the media's bias eventually bites them in the rear.
Surely you give Obama more credit than that, if he is only following the wim of his soothsayers, perhaps he will start consulting his appointed astrologist more often!!!
I agree that the media was complicit and enabling, but I think the words "Fundamental Transformation" were not idle talk coming from an Alinsky acolyte. I'm pretty sure they know exactly what they're doing. Where they miscalculated was on their chances of getting caught and it gaining any traction. I still don't believe it would have gained significant traction if they hadn't been found out on news-media wiretapping.
There is a consolation prize to be won...it is called a Pulitzer!
There is a lot of nefarious undertakings that this administration has engaged in. Republicans believe there is a double standard in reporting. It would be redeeming if the MSM assured them otherwise by vigorously bringing to light the misdeeds of this administration and dispelling the unearned praise of this administration.
Almost never do I post a comment on any article. But I have to applaud Mr. Whelton for so clearly and concisely summing up what I believe is the major mechanism behind BO's historically bad executive record - a complete lack of accountability for BO. Moreover, I think this column explains what the major lesson to our country from BO's presidency will be - the press must hold those in power accountable at all times, regardless of party. The consequences of not doing so are on display presently and look downright Orwellian and 3rd worldly.
If the press had reported honestly about Obama from the beginning, he would never have been elected to the highest office in the land; not with his long list of shady connections.
My God, Finally. This is the best discription of the abdication of the responsibilty of a free press.
Hope everyone that cares on both sides of the political debate read this.
Clark Whelton well done well said.
It's called the Taranto Principle: http://www.nysun.com/opinion/the-taranto-principle/86573/
The media acted like sycophants instead of like watchdogs.
But they forgot that sycophants are utterly contemptible people, prostituting themselves for free. And contemptible people get taken advantage of.
Even escorts in brothels don't give anything away for free.
But will their own epidemic pathological narcissism continue to rocket-fuel and to-jam the throttles of the lock-step-lemming "news" media, as they rush to their own date with destiny?
please pardon my several typos. I think I am touchtyping, but what goes up is full of little bloopers. I could fix them, but will let readers fill in the potholes.
Are shocked? It was evident, who and what Obama was — to me — from ocular proofs, to allude Othello's sine qua non. But it seems to me most around were born the other week. I, however, was given a picture book cocktail table sized, of black and white fotos from the world press ... in 1936 or so. I can still see many of the images I studied as a child does. One that interested me then was of Benito Mussolini in his military regalia, speechifying. He had been a journalist, and he plastered the barns of Southern Italy with Yes we can slogans and such like, still visible in the 1960s when I drove about lecturing. The foto I recall was the one with his chin up, shot from below, very aggressive and commanding. To my amazement it was not only famous, ubiquitous portrait of Obama, postered and bumberstickered, but a constant gesture or attitude has most of the struck for speechifying. Great orators, both. What? Take a look next time. Our tv and cameras are today sharp and utterly revealing, if one looks simply and naively at what is shown. Test it for yourselves...
The 4th Estate is Obama's 5th Column. That is a disaster for the Republic.
sounds as if you're blaming the press because they "tempted"the president to do what he has done. you're crazy, he did what he did because he wanted to and would have done so regardless of the press. he sure isn't changing his behavior now that he's getting a wee bit of bad press. he's to blame period.
"fleeing suspicions of malfeasance and outright criminality, the Obama administration is pleading guilty to incompetence and ignorance."
Not yet, and by a long-shot in the administration. Ignorance of the law is still an excuse for them as well as ignorance in how to administer the law. I recuse myself after the fact is brilliant perhaps as a way to restructure the standard for Islamic divorce and sharia prenups.
As the radical journalist I.F. Stone noted, "all governments lie, but disaster lies in wait for countries whose officials smoke the same hashish they give out."
In a Time of Torment, 1961-1967 (1967), p. 317