We are developing the social individualist meta-context for the future. From the very serious to the extremely frivolous... lets see what is on the mind of the Samizdata people.

Samizdata, derived from Samizdat /n. - a system of clandestine publication of banned literature in the USSR [Russ.,= self-publishing house]

It’s showtime at the White House

Here is a revealing article in the Washington Post – hardly a newspaper of the conservative or libertarian side – that mocks the fawning treatment of Mr Obama by much of the press. Things change but there are continuities: I can remember how Tony Blair, or, for a while, Bill Clinton got such an easy ride in the press. The media was studiously easy on JFK in the early 1960s and covered up Kennedy’s numerous extra-marital affairs. Sure, Bush jnr got an easy ride from some of the Right – remember when Andrew Sullivan practically wrote love letters to Dubya before the gay marriage thing sent Sully off the edge? – but there was not the kind of broad-based cult of worship that there now is around the community organiser from Chicago.

Apart from Fox, the editorial pages of the Wall Street Journal, a few niche publications like the American Spectator and the blogs, Mr Obama has had a remarkably easy ride and it does not seem to be ending soon. In part this is because much of the liberal media, even if some of its more intelligent denizens know that this is a bit silly, are playing as a “team” for Their Man, and don’t want to be seeing doing anything that might help the other side.

There has always been, and always will be, slanted coverage of public affairs, and it will continue. Even if the BBC in the UK were scrapped tomorrow and its reporters sent off to planet Titan, the fact is that there will be a substantial block of leftish/liberal media types and pundits. But the sheer, jaw-dropping bias of the White House press corps is something to behold. But maybe, just maybe, there are signs of cracks in the facade. I cannot help but think that Obama has, by trying to be all cool and sophisticated over the Iranian turmoil, started to piss off even parts of his side. He does not walk on water, and it is about time that this fact was noted. The stance now adopted by the media is not one suitable for self-respecting adults.

16 comments to It’s showtime at the White House

  • Alisa

    The writer seems to be an interesting character. He must be doing something right to be so disliked by both sides.

  • Sam Duncan

    I’m not sure. From here, it looks exactly like the late ’90s Blair love-in. He can do no wrong, even when he’s stomping his great plates all over established precedents and protocol. I just wonder what his Iraq will be…

  • llamas

    Yesterday’s presser, in which President Obama called upon a hastily-accredited blogger from the Huffington Post and actually told him what question to ask, just made me blink. And the rest of the WH press corps just sat there and watched as the President scripted his own press conference.

    As another has written, they are so far in the tank for President Obama, it might be as well if they started donning scuba gear.

    But, of course, the President (despite his short tenure) already has a well-developed reputation for throwing his most ardent supporters under the bus. And these chuckleheads may discover, to their amazement, that it is quite possible to be both in the tank and under the bus – at the same time.



  • Thomas Jackson

    ABC television network is going to allow an infomercial for Presidente 666’s state healthcare proposal without giving time to any dissenting views. Now I would hope any program would show both the pro and con sides, but for a network to bend over makes one long for the honesty of Pravda.

    There is little doubt why the MSM is held in such low repute in the USA (ranking lower than politicians, used car salesmen and lawyers). One wonders why they rank higher than child molesters.

    But if the American media is bad one only look to Europe’s media to see what bad is. I gave up on the Economist after realizing their correspondents seemed to believe the US consisted solely of NYV, DC and Los Angeles and had never set foot in the vast wilderness beond those cities.

  • PersonFromPorlock

    Even if the BBC in the UK were scrapped tomorrow and its reporters sent off to planet Titan….

    I can’t quite make it out, but I’m sure there’s a potential Golgafrincham joke in there somewhere. As for:

    The stance now adopted by the media is not one suitable for self-respecting adults.

    Well, yes. That’s why they aren’t bothered by it.

  • The stance now adopted by the media is not one suitable for self-respecting adults.

    And, with respect to Barry, never has been.

  • Nuke Gray!

    Now how do you know HE can’t walk on water? Just because you have never seen HIM, HE may be practicing humility! After all, Jesus only walked on water once, when he needed to keep an appointment. Just wait until the next floods hit New Orleans- then you’ll be sorry, you doubters!

  • Subotai Bahadur

    Mr. Pearce,

    The willing subservience of what passes for our media to the Democratic Party and its occupant in the White House is far worse. Yes, ABC is broadcasting an all evening infomercial for Nationalized Health Care from the White House. They are not allowing anyone to speak in opposition to State control of the health system, and have specifically refused to allow any sponsors to present countering views. It also announced that it was moving part of its regular news operation physically inside the White House.

    But this is the tip of the iceberg. In March it was revealed that there is a thing called the JournoList. It is an online email listserve that has major editors, journalists, columnists, and bloggers coordinating their talking points. Although they deny it is some sort of conspiracy, from what has been revealed about it; its membership is exclusively liberal and they have been caught coordinating stories and daily talking points.

    National Review Online

    The next interesting question is who is feeding them the talking points. How about the White House and the Democratic Party?



    In this country our Main Stream Media pretends to be politically independent, but in fact their hearts and minds [and output] are owned in fee simple by the Left. And their pronouncements on political matters have as much real world credibility as those of the Völkischer Beobachter had when discussing anything Jewish.

    One believes anything said by them at one’s intellectual peril. One follows their recommendations at one’s physical, financial, and moral peril.

    Subotai Bahadur

  • Paul Marks

    President Barack Obama says that the argument that his plan is a Trojan horse for the government takeover of the half of American health care that the government does not already control (about half of American health care is taxpayer funded – and the other half is insanely twisted and inflated by these subsidies and by the endless regulations) is a “scare tactic”. However, Barack Obama is on tape (from 2003) openly saying that he wanted a “single payer” system (i.e. total government control) and planned to get there gradually – i.e. by stealth.

    ABC and the day of propaganda:

    Well even before yesterday ABC was giving Obama three times more favourable coverage on health care than it was giving opposition to the total government take over. So going for a blanket ban on politicians and groups opposed to their false God Barack Obama was the next logical step.

    The lies are irritating – for example the claim that ABC did not carry ads opposing the government health care plan because “we do not run issue ads” (ABC does, and has done many times). But there we go.

    However, we should remember that NBC and CBS are even worse than ABC.

    NBC (owned by General Electric – which is a debt supported arm of the regime) deserves no comment. But CBS is almost as bad.

    For example, on Father’s Day there was a special show on how Barack Obama could teach people to be better fathers. And such tough questions as “with your own father absent, how did you learn to love everyone as you do” were asked.

    Even the BBC (for many years a leftist broadcaster) was shocked by the Cult of Personality on American network television news and current affairs.

    They might as well chant “there is no God and his name is Obama” constantly.

    It is astonishing that tens of millions of Americans (although sadly not yet the majority) manage to resist the brainwashing of the “education system” (including many of the private schools – not just the government schools and colleges) and the “mainstream” print and broadcasting media (including the entertainment media).

  • It is astonishing that tens of millions of Americans (although sadly not yet the majority) manage to resist the brainwashing of the “education system” (including many of the private schools – not just the government schools and colleges) and the “mainstream” print and broadcasting media (including the entertainment media).

    It’s not all that astonishing. The brainwashing is really obvious and really bad in the US, so it’s not hard to see through it. A commenter above said he longed for the honesty of Pravda, but I would say the MSM in the US is actually pretty close. If the BBC gets away with it more than the American MSM, that’s only because the BBC uses bigger words and makes an effort at keeping up the pretense of objectivity that goes beyond just constantly reminding viewers that they are obligated to report all sides. Thank God for small favors, then. If the American media and educational establishment are biased, at least they aren’t subtle about it.

  • Alisa

    Joshua, you are probably right about the media (I say ‘probably’ because I mostly stopped reading and watching years ago), but I’m afraid that it may not be so simple when it comes to the education system.

  • Millie Woods

    Are all you posters as well as the author of the article naive or what? Obama like most of the press corps is an inarticulate individual who my French speaking countrymen would describe as non-cultive. He cannot construct a meaningful sentence from scratch hence the teleprompter. He and all his cohorts slaughter the English language in the majority of their utterances. But worst of all neither the press nor Obama understand pure and applied science. They are for the most part techno peasants floundering about cluelessly.

  • Alisa –

    Are you talking about the secondary education system or the university system? If the latter, I agree with you. If the former, I think it’s “mostly harmless.” Piss poor at educating people, mind you, but pretty bad at indoctrinating them by the same token.

    American universities are a real problem, though. And there’s no easy solution, right.

  • Subotai Bahadur

    Millie Woods @ June 25, 2009 09:42 PM

    If what you say is true, and I do not argue it is not, it is still not relevant to the problem of his ascension to power, quest for ultimate and permanent power, and the absolute worship that our media accords him.

    Despite our media declaiming that he is the new Demosthenes; he can only function in a scripted, controlled, and essentially friendly media environment that will cover his sorry tuchus by concealing his many mistakes, contradictions, and felonies. Yes, as far as science, economics, and history are concerned; he is dumber than several boxes of rocks. In fact, both ignorant AND stupid; and that is said with full knowledge of the difference.

    However, those who would be tyrants historically have not been either great orators or classically educated persons. Hitler was a great orator in German. It may have had something to do with his Austrian accent which is akin to our southern drawl. But he was superstitious, scientificly illiterate, and subject to racial fantasies.

    Iosef Vissarionovich Djugashvili, aka Stalin was an appalling orator, also scientifically illiterate, and a believer in what is functionally the religion of Marxism-Leninism.

    Napoleon Bonaparte was brilliant, albeit more of a writer than an orator.

    Mao Tse-tung was an illiterate peasant whose knowledge of the world was not consonant with reality.

    The various short containers of damaged chromosomes going under the assumed family name of Kim which has destroyed North Korea combine ignorance, stupidity, and a host of psychological pathologies.

    These individuals share several things. First, is a desire for power outside the norms of their respective societies. Second, is a ruthlessness and willingness to destroy persons and institutions to achieve those ends. Third, they have the ability to draw in those from society’s elite who do have the knowledge and the classical elite education to carry out those ruthless wishes. They can be drawn in by fear, ambition, or greed; but aspiring tyrants do not lack for acolytes.

    The point of it all, is that our media has made their bargain with Obama regardless of his faults; sacrificing any semblance of journalistic ethics and professionalism [I apologize for the oxymoron] and personal integrity to support his quest for power and the remaking of the United States. They seem to think that if he fails or falls, that all will be forgotten and forgiven. And if he succeeds, they will sit at his right hand. Both beliefs indicate faulty reality testing.

    Subotai Bahadur

  • Paul Marks

    Mao was a highly educated man (in the Chinese classics and then in Western stuff) who first became interested in Marxism at teacher training collage – which was as dominated by socialist thought as most of them still are.

    It is true that Mao’s father was a farmer (“peasant” might confuse matters as his father owned the land he farmed – as did most Chinese farmers at the time, contrary to later Communist propaganda), but Mao himself never worked on the land – and despised people (including his father) who did (again contrary to Communist propaganda which stressed how he loved the peasants).

    For more information – see “Mao: The Untold Story” by the writer of “Wild Swans”.

    However, it is true that Mao had no interest in physical reality.

    Stalin (for example) was just as brutal (although he murdered fewer people) but had a real interest in mechanics and so on – and had some real knowledge of such subjects.

    There is nothing so practical in Mao – he was a poet (although his poetry declined over time) and philosopher (his interpretation of Marxist philosophy).

    Even as a child he refused to do any chores round the house or farm – and threatened to kill himself when his father said he should help out a bit (just a bit, not very much).

    His father gave in.

  • Millie Woods

    Sobotai, alll of the demagogic rulers mentioned arose out of forelock tugging traditional societies. The New World in general does not suffer from the the same slavish obeisance to authority meme and quite possibly the misguided and idiotic boomer style incompetentas in the White House will be given the heave ho in due course..
    The reason Barack Obama is president is because millions of misguided Americans wanted to experience a feel good moment by voting for someone with African blood coursing through his veins.
    Neither Obama nor his wife nor any of the other Ivy League graduates with degrees in soft subjects should be taken seriously as achievers. They are recipients of wrong-headed affirmative action do goodism while truly qualified Asians – both Chinese and Indian are relegated to quota systems if they apply to the Ivies.
    The same sort of misguided atonement for so-called past historical wrongs took place in Quebec in 1976 when a lot of anglos who should have known better voted for the separatist Parti Quebecois. The result for Quebec was and is disastrous while Ontario on the ill wind principle benefitted hugely from the anglo diasphora.