You Always Hurt the One You Love

 

In my somewhat brief time upon this Earth, I have never seen a more obsequious D.C. press corps than the one covering President Barack Obama. There was bias during the early Clinton era, but reporters were still quick to joke about his love of fast food and faster women. They were said to fawn over JFK, but that was before my time and we were in a seemingly life-or-death struggle with the Red Menace.

But today’s press goes beyond simple bias or affection. “Obsequious” might not be the right word. I could have used “brown-nosing,” “unctuous” or “deferential.” Maybe “throne-sniffing.” Or “sycophantic.” “Obeisant,” “parasitical,” “compliant,” “worshipful,” “ingratiating,” “servile,” “prostrate,” or “toadying?” Look, the precise word isn’t the point. Let’s just say if any president should be pleased with the fourth estate, it’s Mr. Barack H. Obama of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.

This makes former White House reporter Ann Compton’s revelations all the most ridiculous. Speaking to C-SPAN’s Brian Lamb, the journalist noted that the president launches into “profanity-laced” tirades against the press — to their faces.

COMPTON: I have seen in the last year Barack Obama really angry twice. Both were off the record times. One, profanity-laced where he thought the press was making too much of scandals that he did not think were scandals. Another where he took us to task for not understanding the limits he has with foreign policy and the way he’s dealing with the Middle East and Iraq, and Afghanistan. And I don’t find him apologetic. But I find him willing to stand up to the press and look them in the eye, even though it was off the record and just give us hell.

LAMB: Does he have a point?

COMPTON: From his point of view, he may. But we cover what we are allowed to cover. And when policy decisions and presidents are inaccessible and don’t take questions from the press on a regular basis, I think they get — they reap what they sow.

“But we cover what we are allowed to cover.” After six years of a blundering, paranoid, verbally abusive executive, the press still kowtows to his demands for politically motivated privacy, even as their fellow journalists are bugged and threatened with jail time.

The press isn’t just biased. They’re codependent.

There are 24 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. MJBubba Member
    MJBubba
    @MJBubba

    The lamestream media are leftists.   Obama is their standard-bearer, and no matter how bad he treats them they will protect him.   Revealing his faults would not help the Democrat nominee for 2016, so expect only a little bit of actual journalism to occur during the window that just opened up.

    Odd-Year Journalism just got started, and they will all find a story or two in which they will report actual faults and give negative opinions about Team Obama.   Each outlet and pundit can be counted on for two or three hits against Team Obama over the next 12 months.   This is an exercise in creating fig leaves to cover their journalistic nakedness.   By this time next year we will resume Even-Year Journalism, in which we can expect the lamestreamers to serve unquestioningly as an extension of the Democrat machine.

    The GOP has to quit pretending that the lamestream practice actual journalism.   This is a two-front war.

    • #1
  2. user_199279 Coolidge
    user_199279
    @ChrisCampion

    I think Ziskey had it right about the Russians, and it applies to the press corps.  They are, in fact, wimps – J-school tough guys who’ve never been knocked down in life, and have never learned to stand up on their own.  This means they cling – like gun-luvin’/god-fearin’ people – to their belief system, because to doubt it undermines everything they’ve assembled their weak lives upon.  Candy Crowley’s naked cheerleading (gah) for Barry, during a live debate, was one of the worst displays of partisan bias in someone who’s in a role specifically delineated to be neutral that I’ve seen since the Swiss attacked Pearl Harbor.

    harold ramis stripes

    • #2
  3. Western Chauvinist Member
    Western Chauvinist
    @WesternChauvinist

    I’m not at all surprised to learn this of Obama. The Left has been berating the US for so long — in the news media, in the academy, and in Hollywood — that parts of the population seem to have developed battered-wife syndrome. The media will continue to take abuse from the President. He’s their one and only.

    • #3
  4. Totus Porcus Member
    Totus Porcus
    @TotusPorcus

    My personal favorite description is “bootlicks,” but I recently LOL’d at the euphemism “rumpswabs.”

    • #4
  5. user_5186 Member
    user_5186
    @LarryKoler

    Totus Porcus:My personal favorite description is “bootlicks,”….

    Yes, this is the word you were looking for, Jon. It isn’t so much a favorite of mine as it is perfectly descriptive. The only thing missing for their daily attire is knee pads.

    MJB, I like your odd vs even year journalism description. You are so right that they can be counted on to pretend to be real journalists when it’s convenient and won’t hurt the Dems too much but then they are absolutely dependable in returning to form when an election nears.

    Really, these modern journalists are un-professional. That’s the problem and that’s the word that needs to be crammed down their throats every time they are … uh, you know, un-professional.

    • #5
  6. user_139005 Member
    user_139005
    @MichaelMinnott

    Much of the press reminds me of Toadie from The Road Warrior (Mad Max 2). To paraphrase;

    “The Obangous, the LORD Obangous! Ruler of the wasteland (and one time republic). The Ayatollah…of ROCKNROLLA!!!

    • #6
  7. Larry3435 Member
    Larry3435
    @Larry3435

    Yeah, yeah, the lefties in the media are cheerleaders for Obama.  Stop the presses.  The thing is, there is a conservative media, and it isn’t doing much better.  I understand why the network nightly news did not mention Jon Gruber for weeks after the story broke.  The better question is, why did it take a blogger to break the story in the first place?  The video was out there.  Once someone else pointed them in the right direction, Fox had no problem finding a bunch more videos of Gruber making damning statements.  Why hadn’t anyone looked at that video before?  Especially after Gruber’s stupidly truthful statement last year about the fact that it was deliberate that only state exchanges would qualify for subsidies.

    Why is it that within days of Sarah Palin’s nomination, the lefties had people swarming over her life and digging into her garbage can looking for dirt; but when Obama was a candidate it took months for anyone to notice that he spent his Sundays listening to Jeremiah Wright’s anti-American screeds?  Wright’s views weren’t a secret.  They were selling DVD’s of his sermons in the lobby of the church, for crying out loud!  Why wasn’t there a single conservative journalist in print, television, radio, or anywhere else who could be bothered to stick their head in the door and find out what was going on in there?

    If our side spent half as much time digging up facts as we do whining about media bias, I’m sure we would have plenty more to talk about.

    • #7
  8. Songwriter Member
    Songwriter
    @user_19450

    I’ve said it before. I’ll say it again: The mainstream news media is the enemy.

    EVERYTHING they say and write is at best biased, and at worst a lie. This applies as much to the news they choose NOT to report as to the news they do report. (And I use the word “report” in the very loosest way to describe what it is that journalists do these days.)

    • #8
  9. george.tobin@yahoo.com Moderator
    george.tobin@yahoo.com
    @OldBathos

    This is really shaping up to be Hitler in the bunker. Obama giving orders to divisions of political capital he no longer has while a despondent roomful of MSM (AKA senior staff to to the Volksaufklärung und Propaganda) look on in embarrassed silence.

    Sorry, Mr. President.  The Supreme Court has voided the arrest of Limbaugh, Levin and Hannity.  They are back on the air. The Joint Chiefs have refused to seize Congress and the borders are no longer unguarded.”

    Obama looks determined to go out ugly.  We can hope he takes down with him all his media toadies as well.

    • #9
  10. user_5186 Member
    user_5186
    @LarryKoler

    Songwriter:I’ve said it before.I’ll say it again:The mainstream news media is the enemy.

    EVERYTHING they say and write is at best biased, and at worst a lie.This applies as much to the news they choose NOT to report as to the news they do report.(And I use the word “report” in the very loosest way to describe what it is that journalists do these days.)

    Yes, they are the enemy for the Republicans AND for truth. They have blood on their hands in race relations in this country and with regard to terrorism (Bush lied about WMD and the whole coverage of the Iraq war) and with regard to Israel when they are a media outlet for Hamas and Hezbollah.

    • #10
  11. user_5186 Member
    user_5186
    @LarryKoler

    Old Bathos: Obama looks determined to go out ugly.

    Yes, this is what worries me. The fact that Obama is so clueless that he doesn’t realize how sycophantic the media are and that he then rails against them in private is truly evidence of how out of touch he is. And a man who is this far gone is truly dangerous to the republic.

    There’s a part of me that hopes he raises the ante and a part that worries how far he will go. How much damage can a president do? I think we are about to find out the limits of his hatred of this country.

    • #11
  12. Hartmann von Aue Member
    Hartmann von Aue
    @HartmannvonAue

    Larry3435:

    but when Obama was a candidate it took months for anyone to notice that he spent his Sundays listening to Jeremiah Wright’s anti-American screeds? Wright’s views weren’t a secret. They were selling DVD’s of his sermons in the lobby of the church, for crying out loud! Why wasn’t there a single conservative journalist in print, television, radio, or anywhere else who could be bothered to stick their head in the door and find out what was going on in there?

    If our side spent half as much time digging up facts as we do whining about media bias, I’m sure we would have plenty more to talk about.

    The earliest I remember anyone bringing Wright up was Glenn Beck bringing it to the public’s attention on his TV show, which I think was still on Headline News at the time. Is that right?

    In any case, you’re right on. We need Truth Revolt and the like on the Obama Administration like a monkey on cupcake. FNC alone just doesn’t cut it.

    • #12
  13. user_82762 Thatcher
    user_82762
    @JamesGawron

    Jon,

    The press isn’t just biased. They’re codependent.

    ….hmmm..imagine Dr. Phil excoriating the whole W.H. press core in prime time while a studio audience screams abuse at them…..gee I feel better already.

    Regards,

    Jim

    • #13
  14. Misthiocracy Member
    Misthiocracy
    @Misthiocracy

    Jon Gabriel, Ed.: One, profanity-laced where he thought the press was making too much of scandals that he did not think were scandals.

    I would really like to know if this incident was before or after the mid-term elections.

    It really seems to me that the press only started to cover the White House with any sense of critical integrity once there was no longer any chance it could hurt the President personally.

    • #14
  15. Percival Thatcher
    Percival
    @Percival

    We covered what we were allowed to cover.

    The epitaph for Twenty-first Century journalism.

    Requiescat in perditio

    • #15
  16. user_5186 Member
    user_5186
    @LarryKoler

    Percival:We covered what we were allowed to cover.

    The epitaph for Twenty-first Century journalism.

    Requiescat in perditio

    I can’t like this enough.

    • #16
  17. J Flei Member
    J Flei
    @Solon

    Larry3435:Yeah, yeah, the lefties in the media are cheerleaders for Obama. Stop the presses. The thing is, there is a conservative media, and it isn’t doing much better.

    I never understood why there aren’t more right-leaning tv stations.  I’ve never liked Fox that much (except Special Report).

    • #17
  18. Misthiocracy Member
    Misthiocracy
    @Misthiocracy

    J Flei: I never understood why there aren’t more right-leaning tv stations.

    How about, “because tv stations are regulated by the Federal Government”?

    • #18
  19. Stad Coolidge
    Stad
    @Stad

    Could it be said that because certain media organizations have so much of an (for lack of a better term) incestuous relationship with the Democrat party, these media organizations are no longer entitled to first amendment protection?

    By relationship, I mean two things:

    1) the constant back and forth employment among Democrat elected officials, Democrat administrations, and the media, and

    2) connections via marriage or family ties.

    And yes, I understand this involves Republicans too, but I’ll bet not anywhere near the extent the Dems do it . . .

    • #19
  20. MJBubba Member
    MJBubba
    @MJBubba

    I think you also have to figure in the career path to journalism.   40 years ago a high school grad could get a job with a newspaper or TV station and work his way up.   Now it takes a degree in journalism.   But nearly all the schools of journalism are leftist indoctrination academies.   The journalism faculty is just as hard leftist as the faculty in gender/ethnic studies.   Conservative students switch majors out of journalism long before it is time to graduate or look for faculty recommendations.

    Also, entry-level journalism jobs do not pay well.   Conservative students figure this out, and switch to majors with a better return on investment.   Liberal students just carry the debt and cry louder for government relief.

    • #20
  21. Jon Gabriel, Ed. Admin
    Jon Gabriel, Ed.
    @jon

    Stad: By relationship, I mean two things: 1) the constant back and forth employment among Democrat elected officials, Democrat administrations, and the media, and 2) connections via marriage or family ties.

    This is definitely the case. But with Obama there seems to be an almost religious devotion to the man.

    • #21
  22. Jon Gabriel, Ed. Admin
    Jon Gabriel, Ed.
    @jon

    Larry Koler: Totus Porcus:My personal favorite description is “bootlicks,”…. Yes, this is the word you were looking for, Jon. It isn’t so much a favorite of mine as it is perfectly descriptive. The only thing missing for their daily attire is knee pads.

    Bootlicks is PERFECT.

    • #22
  23. user_5186 Member
    user_5186
    @LarryKoler

    Stad:Could it be said that because certain media organizations have so much of an (for lack of a better term) incestuous relationship with the Democrat party, these media organizations are no longer entitled to first amendment protection?

    By relationship, I mean two things:

    1) the constant back and forth employment among Democrat elected officials, Democrat administrations, and the media, and

    2) connections via marriage or family ties.

    And yes, I understand this involves Republicans too, but I’ll bet not anywhere near the extent the Dems do it . . .

    I like the way you think.

    • #23
  24. Pugshot Member
    Pugshot
    @Pugshot

    “Bootlicks” is good, but personally I prefer Klaus Kinski’s epigram in Dr. Zhivago:

    Lickspittle!

    • #24

Comments are closed because this post is more than six months old. Please write a new post if you would like to continue this conversation.