"The welfare of humanity is always the alibi of tyrants" - Albert Camus

Friday, October 23, 2009

White House - FNC Media War Heats Up

The Obama Administration is proving to be the most Nixonian one since that ill-fated administration. During their first nine months, the WH has managed to create the most polarized media as well as electorate in modern U.S. politics, in great part due to their tactics and unparalleled inability to deal with criticism. The war on Fox News is just one of many the administration has declared including Chrysler bond holders, doctors, health insurance companies, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and conservative pundits among others who are perceived as road blocks to the administration's agenda. The vindictive and petty nature of this self declared war on Fox is clearly hurting the administration by making it look un-presidential, while benefiting Fox by driving its ratings up. The latest battle in this curious war came last Thursday when the administration offered the pay czar to the WH press corps for an interview with the stipulation that Fox would be excluded. Surprisingly, all the other major networks declined the offer if Fox would be excluded - the first sign of integrity main stream media has shown in recent months!

Most observers of this 'war' are frankly puzzled about what the administration hopes to get out of it, even on the political left. Why would an administration that came to power with promises of post-partisanship react so strongly to a news outlet that is critical of it despite the serious political risks such a move brings? The answer may elude most observers who cannot make the connection between the key administration players and the significance of their backgrounds. Consider the following:

The 'Chicago Way': The modus operandi of all the key power brokers in the WH - President Obama, David Axelrod, Rahm Emanuel, and Valerie Jarrett - are all products of the same radical leftist Chicago political machine, one known all too well for its take-no-prisoners, strong arm tactics mired in controversy and institutionalized corruption. Their credentials as such are bona fide.

Obama has been the quintessential Chicago politician ever since the beginning of his political career in 1995. His credentials also include strong arming private institutions as a community organizer, including representing the now-disgraced ACORN in their litigation of Citibank for their supposedly 'less than stellar lending record' to inner city minorities as well as his close connections to the Daley machine, Tony Rezko, Bill Ayers, Governor Blagojevic, and variety of other corrupt, radical political personalities. Like Obama, Jarrett, Axelrod and Emanuel also have had close ties to Harold Washington and Richard Daley machines as well as radical organizations like STORM. Furthermore, Emanuel is known in Washington circles with his temper and thuggish behavior, which includes having sent a dead fish to a pollster he took issue with while he was in Congress.

The existence of a Nixonian enemies list is by now well accepted among Washington circles as well as in the blogesphere - both on the right and the left. In the short 9 months since taking office, the Obama WH has succeeded in putting together an enemies list that includes anyone who poses perceived threat to their agenda. Although it is difficult to buy in to the speculation in some circles that President Obama is just a tool for the other three who are the real brains in the daily operations of the WH, it is logical to deduce that this is a group effort by four purpose driven ideologues with what can be called socialist, if not Marxist, pasts. As such, and being the products of their political environment, they see this as their best and probably only chance to influence the course of this nation and are determined to succeed at any cost. The question is, will America wake up in time?


Victor said...

Just to comment in one specific thought you had: the alleged war on Chrysler bond holders?

So, these people -the bond holders- purposely buy bonds of a company they very well know is bankrrupt (that has been the case for a while and bond holders are among the saviest of all investors) and somehow we are supposed to bail them out as well?

What happened to personal responsibility?

It serves them right. They bought a dead company because they thought they were going to get bailed out by the government, just like other companies in the banking system.

Who in his right state of mind would buy bonds of a US car manufacturer?

The Patriot said...

The bond holders are debt holders. The difference between a debt holder and an equity holder is the risk. Equity is always subordinated to debt, as such, the courts honor debt holders claims first. That is the law. Here, the government took the court's place and turned the process upside down. How else do you explain the union getting a better deal than the bond holders? This had nothing to do with personal responsibility. Debt financing is the reason Chrysler lasted as long as it did. If you are advocating the abandonment of debt (at appropriate returns based on risk) as an important form of capitalizing the private sector, please post your alternative suggestions. Chrysler bond holders thought they were going to be compensated appropriately until the rule of law was blatently violated.

C said...

The Patriot is right. It seems like Victor is assuming that most of the bonds were purchased when it was apparent that Chrysler was going to go under. This is not the point. The point is that the Obama Administration was allowed to thuggishly railroad the bond holders, when the law says that the bond holders are supposed to get paid first! Obama is being allowed to change law without the actual changing of law by the lawmakers. That is power that I do not want any U.S. president to have!

Anonymous said...

buy ativan ativan withdrawal shortness breath - ativan side effects stomach upset