Ah yes, the old "not yet" argument. So tell me, Mark. Historically, how much time was there between a tyrant gaining power and the opposition being dragged out and shot?
Axelrod, remember, isn't just any White House official, but the ultimate political insider, the fixer whose wizardry created Obama. He cooked up the defining "Hope" and "Change" slogans, and the Obama "narrative," enabling a man with far-left ideas to reach the White House. With no Axelrod, there'd be no President Obama.
It's a bad development because even though Axelrod is supposedly giving commentary, the ugly fact is that commentary effectively becomes the news for much of the electorate in the current era.
What's more, Team Obama has declared it has no intention of dismantling its campaign apparatus post re-election. Put Axelrod in the catbird seat at a news outlet and the "narrative" continues. Combine that with Team Obama's masterful manipulation of journalists, its command of social media, and an ugly picture emerges of a press indistinguishable from the political establishment.
This has happened in banana republics, but never in a Western democracy. Already it's making old-school journalists who value news gathering over politics, such as the New York Times' Roger Cohen, ABC's Ann Compton and the Washington Post's David Ignatius, uncomfortable. The one thing that will stop it is a press that won't cooperate. So where is that press?
With more technology, and fewer resources at many media companies, the balance of power between the White House and press has tipped unmistakably toward the government. This is an arguably dangerous development, and one that the Obama White House — fluent in digital media and no fan of the mainstream press — has exploited cleverly and ruthlessly. And future presidents from both parties will undoubtedly copy and expand on this approach.
“The balance of power used to be much more in favor of the mainstream press,” said Mike McCurry, who was press secretary to President Bill Clinton during the Monica Lewinsky scandal. Nowadays, he said, “The White House gets away with stuff I would never have dreamed of doing. When I talk to White House reporters now, they say it’s really tough to do business with people who don’t see the need to be cooperative.”
2 comments:
Ah yes, the old "not yet" argument. So tell me, Mark. Historically, how much time was there between a tyrant gaining power and the opposition being dragged out and shot?
----------
Simple questions Mark refuses to answer:
Is the Constitution law? (42 days and counting)
Is "false" equal to "truth"? (4 days and counting)
Bonus question:
Why would an uninsured person going to the ER cause insurance rates to go up? (2 days and counting)
Who needs to take people out back and shoot them (which looks really bad and can be hard to get away with today) when you can do stuff like this?
With Axelrod At NBC, The Politicos Become The Press
Axelrod, remember, isn't just any White House official, but the ultimate political insider, the fixer whose wizardry created Obama. He cooked up the defining "Hope" and "Change" slogans, and the Obama "narrative," enabling a man with far-left ideas to reach the White House. With no Axelrod, there'd be no President Obama.
It's a bad development because even though Axelrod is supposedly giving commentary, the ugly fact is that commentary effectively becomes the news for much of the electorate in the current era.
What's more, Team Obama has declared it has no intention of dismantling its campaign apparatus post re-election. Put Axelrod in the catbird seat at a news outlet and the "narrative" continues. Combine that with Team Obama's masterful manipulation of journalists, its command of social media, and an ugly picture emerges of a press indistinguishable from the political establishment.
This has happened in banana republics, but never in a Western democracy. Already it's making old-school journalists who value news gathering over politics, such as the New York Times' Roger Cohen, ABC's Ann Compton and the Washington Post's David Ignatius, uncomfortable. The one thing that will stop it is a press that won't cooperate. So where is that press?
Behind the Curtain: Obama, the Puppet Master
With more technology, and fewer resources at many media companies, the balance of power between the White House and press has tipped unmistakably toward the government. This is an arguably dangerous development, and one that the Obama White House — fluent in digital media and no fan of the mainstream press — has exploited cleverly and ruthlessly. And future presidents from both parties will undoubtedly copy and expand on this approach.
“The balance of power used to be much more in favor of the mainstream press,” said Mike McCurry, who was press secretary to President Bill Clinton during the Monica Lewinsky scandal. Nowadays, he said, “The White House gets away with stuff I would never have dreamed of doing. When I talk to White House reporters now, they say it’s really tough to do business with people who don’t see the need to be cooperative.”
----------
Simple questions Mark refuses to answer:
Is the Constitution law? (43 days and counting)
Is "false" equal to "truth"? (5 days and counting)
Bonus question:
Why would an uninsured person going to the ER cause insurance rates to go up? (3 days and counting)
Post a Comment