The Glass House
July 29, 2010 by Ben Crystal
In the wake of the Georgia (where I reside) primary on July 20, I was going to cobble together some salient thoughts about the American system of electoral politics and the inevitable nastiness that goes foot-in-mouth along with it.
And then web content impresario Andrew Breitbart dove headfirst into seriously hot water last week. Breitbart evidently doctored a video tape of United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) official Shirley Sherrod to make her seem racist. At the time, Sherrod was speaking to the NAACP, so many conservatives assumed she was as racially mistuned as her audience.
Liberal outrage over Breitbart’s shameful (alleged) misdeeds turned the story into a national headline. But while liberals nationwide howled with rage, another story broke the same day. And this one was a real Daisy Cutter: The Daily Caller (DC) broke the news that the mainstream media (MSM) was playing dirty for Barack Obama.
The DC piece included predictably self-important journalists brazenly discussing the best methods to protect poor Obama from evil right-wing bastards. Thus did my musings on choosing between “least stomach-churningly awful” candidates at the ballot box get shuffled into my computer’s hard drive next to the “gourmet meals you can make in the microwave” recipes.
During the 2008 Presidential campaign we were introduced to a fine Chicago clergyman named Jeremiah Wright. Rev. Wright presided over a fine congregation in a fine Midwestern city. Among his fine congregants was a fine U.S. Senator named Barack Obama. Fine. Except that Rev. Wright doesn’t feel fine about many of us. In fact, Rev. Wright has a rather poor opinion of:
- The LAPD (groundbreaking, I know).
- “Uncle” Clarence Thomas (and the “closeted Klan court”).
- Condoleeza Rice (he called her “Condoskeezer—not sure what that means, but I doubt it’s a compliment.)
- The War on Terror.
- Pretty much every president since Hoover.
- The outcome of WWII (Really? Really.)
But the DC revealed the MSM literally planned a pass for poor Barack. After all, they reassured us, he couldn’t possibly have known everything Wright was saying—he was busy. The facts that Obama had been a member of Wright’s church for two decades and had even donated $20,000 to the cause were glossed over. Only a racist would continue to look under Obama’s Chicago stones (pay no attention to Bill Ayers, there).
Flash forward to 2010. Obama is firmly ensconced in the people’s digs at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. And to quote the erstwhile pastor of Trinity United Church of Christ: “…the chickens have come home to roost…”
DC’s investigation unearthed scores of documents revealing a concerted effort on the part of the MSM to drive a stake into the heart of Wright-gate in specific and criticism of Obama in general. Journalists at outlets major and minor are named in the DC’s trove of notes, offering shocking invective—including suggestions on how to falsely smear conservatives with the “racist” label in an effort to “change the subject,” tips on how to kill any negative stories on Obama, plans to convince a potential Obama administration to pull Fox News‘ FCC license (they can’t), and my personal favorite—NPR contributor Sara Spitz (your tax dollars at work, kiddies!) describing her laughter at the hoped-for death of Rush Limbaugh in lurid detail.
Imagine the outrage should Fred Barnes (the subject of one of the “let’s call him a racist even though he isn’t” plans) attend Sunday services at the 1st Church of the White Devil Slave Master. Even if he was simply there to observe, his career would be cooked like the slowest turkey on Thanksgiving.
If Limbaugh were to suggest the eye-popping expiration of the uber-shrill Julianne Malveaux, the left would howl with indignation—the gals at Malveaux’s Bennett College for Women might even suspend afternoon interpretive dance and pottery classes!
To satisfy my own curiosity I took a peek at a couple of MSM offerings while researching this piece. Surely, with The Washington Post’s ombudsman Andrew Alexander publicly admitting his paper had fumbled the snap on the New Black Panther Party story, the revelation by DC of an actual liberal media conspiracy would result in at least marginal introspection from the MSM amidst indignant shrieks over Breitbart’s actions—or so I thought. Instead:
- CNN: Their top story was a thought-provoking analysis of Mel Gibson. At least, I assume it was thought-provoking. They also featured some story about Lindsay Lohan, which puts them in the lofty company of The National Enquirer.
- The New York Times: Hillary Clinton announced new sanctions against North Korea. That actually marks a departure from the policies of her husband, who gave billions to the wobbly leg of the Axis of Evil.
- The Washington Independent: WI’s Spencer Ackermann was among the most vocal of the DC-identified conspirators. I expected at least a mild disavowal. Nope. They’re upset about nuclear power plants. I was excited for a moment, until I realized they’re against them. Foreign oil interests indeed.
- The Huffington Post: Their lead story is about Republicans smoking cigars or some other feigned outrage. The response to DC story merely claims that DC employees were also on the “Journo-list.” So, they’re admitting they showed a copy of their plan to the bad guys. Brilliant.
- MSNBC: Ask their “viewer.” I’m sure he/she would relish the attention.
All of the aforementioned covered the Breitbart/Sherrod tale with the kind of breathlessness that fogs the windows of teenagers’ cars.
What we’re really seeing is the confirmation of something most of us already knew: the so-called MSM will lie down in traffic (or at least hurl what’s left of their ethics into the road) for Obama. While you’re scratching your heads in bewilderment as libs lose their cookies over Breitbart’s “cooking” of the Sherrod tape—all the while managing to ignore far-left hack Keith Olbermann’s cut-n-splice assault on Limbaugh from last week, I have a question for the class: Why?
The same media flacks who participated directly or indirectly with the now in-their-own-words-established pro-Obama charade told us back in 2008 that electing Obama was akin to welcoming the Savior. There was going to be Hope and Change. They even told us that we were racist if we dared ask what Hope and Change might mean.
Obama was brighter, cooler, more astute and even better-looking than the rest of us. His victory in November was going to end war (oops), restore the economy (oops), bring transparency to government (oops), and reach out to the opposition to bring us all together under the Big Tent of Democracy (oops). He fired the CEO of GM and none of us even got a cool new Camaro like the one in Transformers: The Movie.
So why does Obama need the help? This is a guy who won a Nobel Peace Prize on spec. He was a community organizer. He’s BLACK (-ish..cablinasian, maybe?) That last fact alone was supposed to usher in at least what the MSM called a “post-racial presidency.”
Instead, the hate-spewing left merely slapped the paintbrush of accused bigotry on anyone who opposed the Obama agenda. We now know they even discussed it in advance.
But this isn’t just about the revelation of a concerted effort to protect Obama from reasonable scrutiny with defamatory finger-pointing. My July 22 column: A Light in the Darkness examined part of this controversy. But the fallout from the “Journo-list” exchanges is something new: incontrovertible evidence, in the words of the offenders themselves, that you simply cannot trust the MSM any further than you can pick them up and throw them (with the exception of George Stephanopolous, whom I’m fairly certain I could heave a good distance).
There’s a part of me that hopes these guys are all just morons. Charlie Gibson said he didn’t know about ACORN, he was on vacation. Bob Schieffer said the same thing about the NBPP scandal. Stephanopolous thinks Obama isn’t getting enough credit for dealing with terrorism.
Last week the NAACP, fresh from demonstrations on behalf of cop-killer Troy Davis, issued a statement calling the Tea Party racist. The statement went unaccompanied by equally strong condemnations of the New Black Panther Party, John Lewis (“they shouted epithets and spat! I swear!”) or people who murder police officers.
The NAACP’s lack of condemnation of the utterly condemnable was itself unaccompanied by comment by the MSM. They were too busy describing Michelle Obama’s fetching ensemble while she intimated that childhood obesity might be caused by (shocker) racism.
I have no trouble condemning Breitbart’s allegedly dastardly acts. You get caught acting the rat, you have to take the cheese. But Breitbart is one rodent. The Main Stream Media is infested, and no one seems to be calling for the exterminator.