Today, The Boston Globe is in "last-ditch" negogiations with its unions to see if the paper can extract enough concessions to stay afloat financially. If the Globe, which is owned by the NY Times corporation, goes out of business, my view would be: good riddance. What public purpose does the Globe -- or the Times for that matter -- serve? None, unless supporting liberals in their political fantasies qualifies as a purpose. What's wrong with MSM?
It can ignore a great deal, but as a friend suggests, they couldn't ignore a white-hot smoking gun. The AP is sympathetic to Obama, but it would not sit on a major story. The AP and Reuters will almost always tell the basic facts about what's happening (e.g., how many people got killed or injured in a terroristic attack and who claims credit).
Where CNN, the Times, and others go wrong is in treating a major story as a minor one . . . and in buying in too quickly to the spin of the other MSM outlets. People like my friend and I know Obama well enough usually to figure out what's on his mind and what he's trying to hide. And what's on his mind about college records (I assume he had lousy grades but got lots of "scholarships") is something he really doesn't want us to know.
He also may not want us to know what many suspect: that he was listed as an Indonesian citizen in his days at Occidental. Was he listed as an Indonesian national at Columbia and Harvard? We're asking, but they're not telling.
The MSM ought to be all over this story -- like flies on horse manure -- but they choose to ignore it. They don't want to investigate anything that may "hurt" their Beloved Barack.
I remember once when Larry King had Larry Elder, a Black, articulate conservative, on one night, and King was amazed -- stunned -- that Elder didn't like Obama. Larry Elder said, "Look, I'm basically conservative, and Obama is a far-Left liberal, so no, I'm not 'proud' that he got elected."
I think King had never heard anyone, especially a Black, speak the way Elder had. I assumed they'd never invite Elder back. Why have Larry Elder when you can have Donna Brazile?
All around the country what passes for the MSM is either dead or dying. It has earned those fates. If the Globe falls this week, I'll shed no tears. Boston will still have the Herald, which is a much better paper.
The following are Tom Roeser's accurate comments about the increasingly odious Obama:
"His is not a family name, but a bramble bush of inconclusive parentage devoid of familial or parental stability . . . which explains his unfeeling inability to even feign patriotism or loyalty when what is supposed to be his country is under attack by foreign enemies. [In fact,] it is not his country; he knows no loyalty to anyone but himself. He is a multi-layered ideological non-citizen of any country . . . an anomaly of confusion even to himself."
It can ignore a great deal, but as a friend suggests, they couldn't ignore a white-hot smoking gun. The AP is sympathetic to Obama, but it would not sit on a major story. The AP and Reuters will almost always tell the basic facts about what's happening (e.g., how many people got killed or injured in a terroristic attack and who claims credit).
Where CNN, the Times, and others go wrong is in treating a major story as a minor one . . . and in buying in too quickly to the spin of the other MSM outlets. People like my friend and I know Obama well enough usually to figure out what's on his mind and what he's trying to hide. And what's on his mind about college records (I assume he had lousy grades but got lots of "scholarships") is something he really doesn't want us to know.
He also may not want us to know what many suspect: that he was listed as an Indonesian citizen in his days at Occidental. Was he listed as an Indonesian national at Columbia and Harvard? We're asking, but they're not telling.
The MSM ought to be all over this story -- like flies on horse manure -- but they choose to ignore it. They don't want to investigate anything that may "hurt" their Beloved Barack.
I remember once when Larry King had Larry Elder, a Black, articulate conservative, on one night, and King was amazed -- stunned -- that Elder didn't like Obama. Larry Elder said, "Look, I'm basically conservative, and Obama is a far-Left liberal, so no, I'm not 'proud' that he got elected."
I think King had never heard anyone, especially a Black, speak the way Elder had. I assumed they'd never invite Elder back. Why have Larry Elder when you can have Donna Brazile?
All around the country what passes for the MSM is either dead or dying. It has earned those fates. If the Globe falls this week, I'll shed no tears. Boston will still have the Herald, which is a much better paper.
The following are Tom Roeser's accurate comments about the increasingly odious Obama:
"His is not a family name, but a bramble bush of inconclusive parentage devoid of familial or parental stability . . . which explains his unfeeling inability to even feign patriotism or loyalty when what is supposed to be his country is under attack by foreign enemies. [In fact,] it is not his country; he knows no loyalty to anyone but himself. He is a multi-layered ideological non-citizen of any country . . . an anomaly of confusion even to himself."
No comments:
Post a Comment