Daily Archives: January 17, 2009

Media slants and manipulates (Update)

In the 2003 inauguration of Bush,  reporters were attacking the $40 million price tag as obscene. “In a time of war and natural disaster, is it time for a lavish celebration?” ABC’s Terry Moran doubted. The AP’s Will Lester calculated that the money spent on Bush’s inaugural could vaccinate “22 million children in regions devastated by the tsunami….Do we need to spend this money on what seems so extravagant?”

Have we heard one word of criticism from ABC, AP, or anybody else in the MSM about the reported *$160 million the Obama Inauguration will cost?  I haven’t seen or heard anything.  And with the extreme crisis our country is in, you don’t even have to mention the homeless and hungry in other countries to wonder about the extravagance.

This is just one small example of how the MSM slants their coverage.  Anybody who believes a word of what they present to the American people could be pretty close to brainwashed.  In fact, there are many people in this country who are brainwashed because they buy into the hype and spin they hear.  The MSM have an agenda.  Bush never had a chance.  And they still haven’t let up on him.

And it’s really nothing new:

The New York Times asked in a January 3, 1993 headline: “Clinton as National Idol: Can the Honeymoon Last?” Newsweek magazine ran TV ads touting its commemorative edition “that’s sure to be a collector’s item because it covers the most important inauguration of our lifetime.” Wall Street Journal reporter Jill Abramson — now managing editor of news at the New York Times — confessed: “It’s an exciting time to be in Washington….People are excited. They’re happy about change….I think you’re going to see crowds for these inaugural events the likes of which we haven’t seen in Washington ever.”

I think Time magazine has had Obama on the front cover of their magazine 15 times.  And most of those times was before the election.  So as a candidate, is it fair reporting to give him this prominence even before he is elected?  Did it influence the election?  There’s no question it did.  He was the socially acceptable choice, the hip choice, the choice sure to make you look “intelligent” and “inclusive.”

And the MSM has and will cover for Obama.  They won’t let him make any mistakes.  But then maybe not forever.  Don’t they always turn on those they have built up?

President George Bush has been more than helpful and polite and just a stand up guy in making this transition of power go as smoothly as possible.  Unlike the reception he got when he took over from Clinton.  But he put the good of the country first, being fully aware of the importance of this critical time — you know, the time when the whole world is watching.

And the wall to wall coverage has begun.  Coronation is near.

UPDATE:  *””The country is in the middle of the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression, which isn’t stopping rich donors and the government from spending $170 million, or more, on the inauguration of Barack Obama.””  This from ABC, reporting an even larger figure and finally bringing up the extravagance
in light of the economy and pointing out that Obama’s Inauguration Has Been Financed in Part by Bailed-Out Wall Street Executives.

How does that make you feel?  Makes me furious.

Posted:  01.17.09

H/T Power Line


Filed under Barack Obama, Human Interest, Media, politics, President Elect Barack Obama, Uncategorized