Saturday, September 27, 2008

The Media Unaccountability Of Obama Shows That Worse Must Be Expected If He Won

If the major media now refuse to hold Obama accountable for his positions, but cover for him, much as if they were his campaign spokesmen, doesn't it have to be much worse if a sitting president, with all the power of that office, held that racial privilege of media unaccountability? May the electorate reasonably trust major media, officialdom or academia to hold this racial candidate accountable if he became president? They won't do it now, and he has no effective way to get back at them for violating any such omerta, with his current position. One still has to go to the internet or the far right publications to get this most basic and necessary information for voting as a responsible citizen:
________"...Obama voted with his party 96 percent of the time. In the prior two years, his number was 95 percent, making him the fourth most partisan member of the Senate. And not just partisan, but also highly ideological. In 2007, according to the National Journal, Obama's voting record made him 'the most liberal Senator.' Throughout his Senate career, according to Americans for Democratic Action (ADA), the dean of liberal advocacy groups, Obama voted 'right' 90 percent of the time. Actually this is misleading, since ADA counts an absence as if it were a vote on the 'wrong' side. If we discount his absences, Obama voted to ADA's approval more than 98 percent of the time."
...quoted from Joshua Muravchik at (an online-only contribution to) Commentary found via VFR
The worse someone is, the more he gets out of a refusal to bring up negatives. It's hard to think of a more anti-moral proceeding, than one which rewards the bad in proportion as they are bad, and power-greedy. When the very intelligent, worldly, knowledgeable and socially accomplished do precisely the above-criticized operations, isn't it likely to be deliberate and aimed at aggrandizing power? There's little chance of a mistake, other than a typical one of over-ambition, which is an occupational hazard, so to speak, of their avocation to power.

No comments: