Opinion by George McClellan:
The main stream media can’t keep up the charade anymore. Some in their ranks are begrudgingly acknowledging they are Liberal and in the Democrats pocket and admittedly have morphed from journalists to political acolytes of Progressive-Liberalism. They will do anything, anything, to keep a Marxist at the helm of America’s government. They’re all in for Hill.
Inadvertent apostates from liberal dogma, like Matt Lauer of NBC’s Today Show, who failed to pursue the media’s understood rules of lobbing easy questions to Liberals and “got ‘cha questions” to conservatives, is learning to his chagrin, that even being popular on air is not proof against public crucifixion for his apostasy. “How dare him ask Hillary tough questions requiring answers that she doesn’t want to know the answer to.” Shocking!
This next Monday, is the first face to face public debate between Hillary and The Donald, to be moderated again by a liberal acolyte of Progressive journalism. Using poor Matt Lauer as an example, these pundents are threatening the moderators, starting with Lester Holt of NBC, warning them to be tough on Trump and give Hillary a pass. Who would of thought?
Already the media thought police have declared Donald Trump to be insufferably “polarizing” not to mention being a racist, a sexist and unqualified to be president and therefore fair game for the hard questions, not on the issues, but on his racism, sexism and his temperament.
Poor Matt Lauer is being pillared for actually asking Hillary about her e-mail scandal but not telling Trump to his face that he was unqualified. Failing to do what was expected of him, Lauer is now derided as a fool and an embarrassment. His failure constitutes a serious crisis for them, the truth. Conservatives are clearly to be treated to different standards than Liberals.
In a recent NY Times article, Jim Rutenberg warned his colleagues: “If you’re a working journalist and you believe that Donald J. Trump is a demagogue playing to the nation’s worst racist and nationalistic tendencies, that he cozies up to anti-American dictators and that he would be dangerous with control of the United States nuclear codes, how the heck are you supposed to cover him?…It is journalism’s job to be true to the readers and viewers, and true to the facts, in a way that will stand up to history’s judgment. To do anything less would be untenable.” Read between the lines on this one. History’s Judgement? Whose?
Among Eastern liberals, the NYT is still the voice of reason but articles like Rutenberg’s disclose the sick mindset that destroys journalistic objectivity. Maureen Dowd, another Times writer, told NBC’s Chuck Todd on Meet the Press, that (she &) her friends can’t stand Trump: “My friends — one of my friends, Leon Wieseltier, calls it a national emergency. My friends won’t even read any — if I do interviews with Trump. They won’t read them. And basically, they would like to censor any stories about Trump and also censor any negative stories about Hillary. They think she should have a total free pass because as she said at that fundraiser recently, ‘I’m the only thing standing between you and the abyss.’” The abyss indeed.
Are we having fun yet? Watching the apparatus of liberal journalism start to fling apart itself by the centrifugal forces of its lies, disinformation and misinformation, coming apart like a cheap Chinese watch, brings with it a deep moral comfort and unmistakable joy. Yes, of course we do! We love it because it exposes them for what they really are, enemies of America, journalists who as US citizens enjoy the protection of the first amendment right to lie, cheat and steal.
Remember, freedom is the goal, the Constitution is the way. Now, go get ‘em! (22 Sept 2016)