Hanging Offenses in High Places

Hanging Offenses in High Places

Between the Soviet-style propaganda purveyed by President Obama and the White House, the undeniable evidence of their collusion with Islamists, and the ever-widening body of government officials and lawmakers of both parties who have demonstrated that they intend to ignore this treason, our nation is faced with a crisis of unprecedented proportion.

Early this week, Sen. Kelly Ayotte called for the Obama administration to declare war against radical Islam. “[Y]ou have to define your enemy,” Ayotte said on “Fox News Sunday.” “The administration should spend less time on political correctness and more time on a strategy.”

As we’ve seen groups such as the Islamic State and al-Qaida gain ground in the Muslim world, news organizations have described the White House as “struggling with trying to define terrorism.” Meanwhile, President Obama and his surrogates continue to insist that these terrorist organizations and the atrocities they commit have nothing to do with Islam.

“My God, ISIS is taking over the Middle East, and our president can’t even say ‘Islamist terror.’”

– Lt. Col Ralph Peters, Fox News, Feb. 3

It’s not that President Obama can’t utter the phrase “Islamist terror,” it is that he won’t do so, because at this juncture, Obama has become the chief facilitator of Islamist terror on a global scale.

For the record, I have been personally assured by intelligence operatives from the U.S. and Britain, both past and present, that they and other foreign intelligence organizations are “well aware” of who the individual representing himself as Barack Hussein Obama actually is, the parties who orchestrated his rise to power and that his mission is nothing less than to “bring America down.”

As all indicators reveal, this is precisely what he has been doing, despite the wholesale misrepresentations of the administration and the American press. Intelligence groups from outside the U.S. have approached American media representatives with information concerning Obama’s origins and designs; whether their reticence to engage is due to fear, having been compromised, or ideological affinity is anyone’s guess, but they won’t touch it.

Now that we’ve got that out of the way, let’s look at just some of the most recent evidence that tends to bear out what I have been told:

  • The Muslim Brotherhood called for “a long, uncompromising jihad” in Egypt just one day after a delegation of the Islamist group’s key leaders and allies met with the Obama State Department, which was instrumental in the Muslim Brotherhood’s rise to power and short but bloody reign in Egypt in the first place.
  • Rep. Trey Gowdy charged two weeks ago that the Obama administration is purposely slowing a congressional inquiry into the deadly 2012 terror attacks in Benghazi, Libya. It has also been reported that Gowdy is enduring White House intimidation over his pursuit of the investigation. Evidence suggests it is altogether likely that the White House had a hand in orchestrating the Benghazi attack, rather than merely failing to provide adequate military support in time to prevent casualties.
  • The Pentagon, which said mere weeks ago it was “confident” that it could “mitigate any threat of [military] re-engagement” by five Taliban generals swapped last year by Obama for Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl, now says that it can do “very little” to prevent same. The trade of the Taliban generals for Bergdahl, quite possibly an Islamist sympathist and a deserter, was called “treasonous” by retired U.S. Gen. Paul Vallely.
  • The administration admitted last week (in rather cavalier fashion, by the way) that its Iran policy had become one of attempting to slow that nation’s development of nuclear weapons, despite the administration’s earlier claims that it would never allow Iran to possess same. This seems to be in keeping with White House policy, which has incrementally negotiated away America’s leverage against Iran. Considering the potentially deadly implications – a nuclear holocaust, after all – one would think that such action would mobilize every political opponent the president has in seeking his head (figuratively speaking), yet this has not occurred.

As I have detailed in this space on numerous occasions, the Obama administration has been directly implicated in innumerable incidents involving Islamist militants. For a long time, I and other commentators expressed frustration as to why Obama’s political opponents universally failed to pursue this despite Cyclopean heaps of evidence.

During a recent interview on Fox News, former George W. Bush adviser Karl Rove attempted to marginalize truth-seekers on Benghazi by equating them with Obama “birthers,” an apparent ploy to shield those GOP power players involved in America’s Libya policy at the time of the attack, or involved in the coverup concerning motives for the attack.

Among the most prominent – and probably most compromised of the aforementioned GOP power players – would be the chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee in Intelligence at the time, former Rep. Mike Rogers. In 2011, Rogers’ wife, Kristi Rogers, was on the board of directors of a company that was ultimately responsible for outsourcing security at the Benghazi Special Mission Compound. Mike Rogers subsequently and inexplicably stonewalled and obfuscated during House hearings on Benghazi, to the consternation of Republican and Democratic lawmakers alike.

It is said that America’s “ruling class” (as detailed in “the writings of Angelo M. Codevilla) always close ranks to protect their own. It has become tragically apparent that in order to protect their filthy little political fiefdoms, these parties have determined that they must run interference for both the degenerate white-robed sultans and sheiks in the Sunni Muslim world, the black-dress-wearing Shiite mullahs in Iran, as well as the smug, insubstantial usurper in the White House. The common denominator among these is only that little trifle of their intention to destroy America.

This has gone far beyond dishonesty, disloyalty, or even self-aggrandizing corruption. Hanging offenses have been committed by people in high places; the list of such offenses increases daily, as does the number of those who add themselves to the list of the culpable, or dig themselves in deeper with each diversion they craft and lie they utter.

Originally published at WorldNetDaily

Posted by Erik Rush in Columns
Obama and Holder Lied, Cops Died

Obama and Holder Lied, Cops Died

In the ongoing saga of the communist cabal currently driving policy in the White House, we have yet another instance of the most treacherous subversion in high places.

Sadly, in this instance, it is costing lives.

As reported last week by the Heritage Foundation’s Daily Signal news outlet, there is evidence that the Obama-Eric Holder Department of Justice was involved in funding a “community organization” linked to a controversial rap music video glorifying the murder of New York City police officers. It just so happens that two NYPD police officers were subsequently killed by ambush on Dec. 20.

The group, called Bronx Defenders, reportedly received at least $1.5 million in U.S. taxpayer dollars (in grants) from the Department of Justice, and played a prominent role in the cop-killing music video. In the wake of the murders of New York City police officers Wenjian Liu and Rafael Ramos (by a self-styled rapper named Ismaaiyl Abdullah Brinsley, no less), pundits began weighing in on a possible connection between the video and the murders.

As if the DOJ weren’t scandalized enough already …

This raises the question of what function the Justice Department has in subsidizing community organizations in the first place, but I am more concerned with its ironic transformation into an anti-police, anti-law enforcement law enforcement organization.

Outraged? Yes. Surprised? No.

In all honesty, how can we be surprised when everything the DOJ under Eric Holder has represented is illustrative of his long-held radical black nationalist beliefs. It is apparent from the rhetoric he has employed since he was confirmed that he is among the most paranoid and cynical of black Americans. America had just elected its first black president (or whatever passes for black in our society), and Holder called us a “nation of cowards” with regard to addressing issues of race. After taking actions that ought to have landed him in an orange jumpsuit, he had the temerity to whine to an audience at Al Sharpton’s National Action Network after being reminded of his contempt of Congress charge by Rep. Louis Gohmert, R-Texas, during at a hearing of the House Judiciary Committee.

Unfortunately, like Barack Obama’s past, the radical and subversive backgrounds of his would-be minions were not widely shared with the American people back in 2008, or 2009 for that matter.

Read more here



Posted by Erik Rush in Columns
The Unapologetic Dictator and a Useless Congress

The Unapologetic Dictator and a Useless Congress

There has been some outfreakage regarding an incident in which President Obama responded to hecklers in Chicago last week at one of his tedious speeches. Apparently, he was in the Windy City to drum up support for his new immigration measures.

I find this more than a bit ironic, since it was only this past July when black Chicago residents organized to protest Chicago mayor and Obama bath house buddy Rahm Emanuel’s proposal to house some of the “unaccompanied minors” (who were arriving in droves at our border with Mexico) in Chicago. Black residents were opposed to this, given the record high unemployment among blacks there. With good reason, they have been generally disgusted with the deterioration of the city under Emanuel, and feel that Obama has ignored them.

I sometimes wonder how they would have reacted had they known the Obama administration had in fact orchestrated that flood of Mexican and Central American youth.

In any case, Obama was blathering on about the wonderfulness of his policies, and how great it was going to be for the country and the illegal immigrants upon whom he’d recently granted amnesty, or pardoned, or whatever.

A heckler piped up and yelled “You have been deporting families.”

To which Obama responded, “What you’re not paying attention to is the fact that I just took an action to change the law, so that’s point No. 1.”

“I just took an action to change the law…” This is of course the statement upon which some pundits have seized – and it is significant. It is a tacit admission by Obama that he executed an illegal decree. He is not legally authorized to “change law” any more than you or I.

Still, he didn’t seem to have a problem verbalizing this; it was not perceived as a gaffe by the White House or the establishment press, and there were no attempts made to back-pedal the statement.

Earlier this week, House Speaker John Boehner announced plans to address budget issues and the concerns of his GOP colleagues over Obama’s immigration move. Currently, his plan is to defer the fight over immigration until next year.

“This is a serious breach of our Constitution,” Boehner said, but added that Congress has “limited options and abilities to deal with it directly.”

Excuse me?

If I recall correctly, the Executive branch of our government only has as much power as the legislative and judicial branches allow it. I have come to expect criminality from this president, but what is even more disturbing than Obama’s escalating perfidious deportment is the fact that Congress not only refuses to hold him accountable, but they are actually pretending that they have no means to do so.

There are numerous federal agencies and offices, and no doubt countless personnel that will be involved in implementing this non-amnesty immigration order. These entities have every right to refuse to comply with the program, although I don’t see that in the cards.

If the President does not have the legal authority to change law, and Congress does not take steps to prevent the implementation of his edicts, then we have a dictator.

The unlawful and/or unethical measures coming out of this White House on a weekly basis are like a flurry of boxer’s jabs. They are too numerous to count and, to our peril, when one flurry is completed, the public is too stunned to recall where each one hit, and how much damage has been done. This is to say nothing about the more prominent scandals that have mounted to date in which the administration is involved.

Last week, news outlets revealed that the U.S. Treasury’s Inspector General had identified some 2,500 documents (attendant to the Internal Revenue Service nonprofit targeting scandal) which show that taxpayer information held by the IRS was shared with the White House. This week, the White House announced plans to force employers to pay workers more overtime by limiting which workers can be called managers. The increase in part time workers is a direct result of the implementation of Obamacare; the plot to force overtime by government fiat will compromise the profitability of business.

It would be one thing if America had gradually become a nation that favored a monolithic government, a state-controlled economy, stultification of personal liberties, religious persecution, and the like. What has occurred however, is that the tiny minority who do favor such things have incrementally insinuated themselves into positions of power, exploited the system and our civic indolence, and are imposing this paradigm upon us.

For some time, I have wondered how much protecting the legacy of America’s First Black President has been a factor in Congress’ failure to deal decisively with a chief executive who ought to have been removed long ago. Granted that such a position would be superficial and profoundly dangerous, and it is certainly one that Obama has exploited.

The more latitude that Obama takes however, I can’t help but wonder just how many of those in our government who decry these developments are only doing so as an empty gesture, and providing token resistance to the onslaught of totalitarianism in order to keep conscientious Americans at bay – until it is too late to stop the process.

Posted by Erik Rush in Columns
Does White House WANT an Ebola Epidemic in U.S.?

Does White House WANT an Ebola Epidemic in U.S.?

Since the death of Liberian Thomas Eric Duncan and the infection of two nurses who treated him in a Dallas hospital, the Obama administration has vociferously resisted calls from the public, lawmakers and medical professionals to implement travel restrictions to and from (more importantly from) West African nations in which Ebola is raging.

First, we were subjected to the incoherent entreaties from Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) director Dr. Thomas Frieden and the director of the National Institute of Infectious Diseases, Dr. Anthony Fauci, who engaged in wholly unscientific, pre-packaged White House propaganda distribution concerning the disease.

One of the contentions these Obama minions have put forth is in misrepresenting calls for travel restrictions or travel bans as potentially hampering the efforts of Western aid workers in combating Ebola. Despite the fact that no one has called for measures preventing aid to areas in which Ebola is prevalent, Frieden, Fauci and others continue to warn that such policies could deter health-care workers from traveling to West Africa and threaten public health around the globe.

This makes no sense whatsoever, but the mantra continues, and few in the press have challenged this illogical drivel as illogical drivel.

Then, along comes Dr. Craig Spencer, who, after returning from treating Ebola patients in West Africa, breaks out with the infection, smack-dab in the middle of New York City. This, after resuming what he thought was “life as normal” for six days prior to becoming symptomatic.

One of the most notable concerns regarding Dr. Spencer is that he passed the so-called “enhanced screening” that had just been implemented at New York airports for parties who were arriving from West Africa.

Obviously, a bustling metropolis such as New York is one of the last places anyone would hope Ebola might rear its ugly head, but there it was. As a precautionary measure, New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo and New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie ordered health-care workers coming in from West Africa to undergo a 21-day quarantine upon their arrival in those states. Several other states followed suit.

In an almost uncanny twist, and right on the heels of the quarantine orders, along comes Kaci Hickox, a nurse who had just finished treating Ebola patients in Sierra Leone. Last Friday, she flew into Newark Liberty Airport in New Jersey and was promptly quarantined.

Just as promptly, Hickox lawyered up and began screaming to the press and anyone else who would listen that the government was putting her through “emotional and physical stress” and that her “basic human rights” were being violated. In the ensuing firestorm – and after direct pressure from the White House – governors Cuomo and Christie folded like a crappy hand of cards; Hickox was released, and both states agreed to re-evaluate their quarantine policy.

One would think that Kaci Hickox, a health-care professional who had seen the devastation wrought by Ebola, and who understood the risks, would have considered it her civic duty to take one for Team America and sit out the quarantine. I mean, it isn’t like they were sending her to Gitmo. Instead, she chooses to re-define the term “diva” and raise as much hell as possible.

Well, there was a method to Ms. Hickox’s madness – and it lay in the fact that she just happened to be in the employ of the CDC.

Yes, you can pick your jaw up off the floor now, and as humorist Dave Barry was known to say: I am absolutely not making this up. Though efforts were made to scrub the evidence of Kaci Hickox’s affiliation with the CDC from online sources, enough remained to definitively determine that she was not only an employee of the CDC, but a registered Democrat and Obama supporter with a history of left-wing activism.

Earlier this year, Hickox featured prominently in the 63rd Annual Epidemic Intelligence Service (EIS) Conference, a CDC symposium on infectious diseases. Thus, it is no great intellectual leap in considering the timing of Hickox’s quarantine (and subsequent public meltdown), the “omission” of her ties to the CDC and her penchant for left-wing causes to arrive at the conclusion that this stunt just might have been an elaborate White House PR contrivance to foment opposition to Ebola quarantine efforts.

If the administration’s imperative for maintaining unfettered access on the part of potential Ebola carriers to this country isn’t perplexing enough: A State Department memo leaked to Fox News this week suggests that the Obama administration has been considering allowing non-American Ebola patients into the U.S. for treatment. This was confirmed by House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte, R-Va., who told Fox News that his office had received “information from within the administration” that such plans were being developed.

Are they insane? the reader may ask.

Read more here

Posted by Erik Rush in Columns
Dems Realizing Obama’s Danger – to Them

Dems Realizing Obama’s Danger – to Them

“This is a serious disease, but we can’t give in to hysteria or fear …”

– Barack Obama, Oct. 18, 2014

The Jews who had emerged from cattle cars, alarmed because they’d just been ordered to remove their clothes, were also reassured by the Gestapo. They’d had a long, hard trip, they were told, and were only being stripped down for a “common shower.” Of course, the “shower” was a gas chamber, and the rest is history.

This is a hell of a psycho-dynamic Obama is using, in my humble opinion. Telling a population that has every reason to be alarmed not to be alarmed and to trust him and his minions when everything they’ve said to date has been a lie (or at least inaccurate, to those who aren’t fully awake yet) is not only audacious, but it smacks of the subtle manipulation one might encounter from a seasoned domestic abuser or crack interrogator.

Speaking of psycho-dynamics: We’re in the final crucial weeks before an election, and Democrats running for office or re-election don’t want Obama to campaign for them for some reason. One could logically argue that the aversion of Democrats toward Obama is political expedience – but this is Obama, the messianic figure who was going to usher in that bright, new age of peace and prosperity. What could have happened?

By all traditionally employed measures, Obama is unpopular. A recent poll found an overwhelming majority of voters in the most competitive 2014 election states saying that events in the United States are “out of control.” At an event last week for one of the few Democrat candidates that would have him (Anthony Brown, who is running for governor of Maryland), Reuters reported “a steady stream” of people walking out of the venue.

This would explain to some degree the political expedience of Democratic politicians avoiding Obama. But what brought Democratic lawmakers and candidates to this point in the first place? What brought Obama supporters to the place where they would prematurely bail on an event at which their heretofore larger-than-life messiah was physically present?

Read more here

Posted by Erik Rush in Columns

Could Awakened Media Help Remove Obama?

media_suckersOver the last several days, we have seen unprecedented news coverage from the establishment press (“mainstream media”) of stories that evidence not only the detrimental effects of White House policy, but those addressing that which the MSM wouldn’t have touched mere weeks ago – and which could open the door to a discussion of the Obama administration’s criminality.

On Sept. 20, The New York Times published a piece entitled “Suspicions Run Deep in Iraq That CIA and the Islamic State Are United,” which detailed the belief of government and intelligence sources in Iraq that the Obama administration created ISIS employing the CIA. While this has been reported elsewhere and confirmed via the Jordanian government, Middle Eastern and European press, until now, coverage of this (which amounts to treason on the part of the president and members of his Cabinet, past and present) is very new territory for a mainstream press outlet.

“We know about who made Daesh [ISIS],” said Bahaa al-Araji, a deputy prime minister, using an Arabic shorthand for the Islamic State on Saturday at a demonstration called by the Shiite cleric Moktada al-Sadr to warn against the possible deployment of American ground troops. Mr. Sadr publicly blamed the CIA for creating the Islamic State in a speech last week, and interviews suggested that most of the few thousand people at the demonstration, including dozens of members of Parliament, subscribed to the same theory.

The New York Times, Sept. 20, 2014

Last fall we were alerted to the growing annoyance of some press outlets regarding the lack of access to the president provided by the White House compared to previous administrations; one of these organizations was the Associated Press. Last week AP Washington Bureau Chief Sally Buzbee had even more to say. At a joint meeting of the American Society of News Editors, the Associated Press Media Editors and the Associated Press Photo Managers, Buzbee enumerated several profoundly sinister ways the Obama administration is stifling the release of news.

According to Buzbee, these include, but are not limited to:

  • Refusing to allow news organizations to shoot photos or video of bombers as they take off en route to supposed Middle East missions against ISIS, and discontinuing the embedding of reporters.
  • A blackout of information on Gitmo detainees, upcoming trials and court filings, even involving non-classified materials.
  • The intimidation of sources. AP’s transportation reporter’s sources have reported that if they are caught talking to her, they will be fired. Government press officials say their orders are to squelch anything controversial or that makes the administration look bad.
  • Lack of cooperation in Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests. [As an aside, the Obama administration corrupted this process as soon as Obama was inaugurated, and began to filter FOIA information, essentially rendering FOIA useless]. Many federal agencies simply don’t respond at all in a timely manner, forcing news organizations to sue each time to force action.
  • The administration is reportedly trying to control the information that state and local officials can give out. The FBI has directed local police not to disclose details about surveillance technology the police departments use to sweep up cell phone data, for example.

Police State, anyone?

Read more here

Posted by Erik Rush in Columns

Obama the Pro Wrestler President

bho_wrestlerIn the 2006 comedy film “Idiocracy, ” two people who take part in a hibernation experiment wake up 500 years later to discover that Americans have been institutionally and quite profoundly dumbed-down. Very little functions any longer in terms of infrastructure, and society has become a squalid, inefficient joke.

The president of the United States (for whom the protagonist ultimately winds up working) is a characteristically flamboyant former professional wrestler. No smarter or dumber than anyone else, he was presumably elected on charisma only, by a citizenry so stupid they don’t know that spraying Gatorade on crops instead of water isn’t a particularly good idea.

I wouldn’t be the only individual to draw a parallel between this cult film and America under our current president, by the way, but the former pro wrestler chief executive in the movie got me to thinking about pro wrestling, and one thing led to another …

A funny thing about pro wrestling is, of course, the fact that the matches are choreographed; some prefer the term “fake.” An even funnier thing about pro wrestling is the fact that people are strongly discouraged from articulating that the matches are choreographed (or fake) even though it is common knowledge. There are those who are quite ready to come to blows over the authenticity of the sport’s competition, or at least to vehemently deny that the matches are choreographed (or fake). Years ago, a friend of mine was actually choked into unconsciousness by a pro wrestler for being so rash as to suggest that the matches were faked. I kid you not. It wasn’t a publicity issue, either; only the two men were present at the time.

Now, I realize – as many pro wrestling fans are quick to point out – that choreographed matches in no way detract from the athleticism of the participants, particularly these days, wherein the matches are far more physically dynamic than they were 40 years ago, when the sport was dominated by older, fat guys in Greco-Roman wrestling garb.

The parallel I recognized between “Idiocracy,” the pro wrestling culture and the Age of Obama was this curious phenomenon of our not being allowed to articulate the facts of this choreography (or fakery) that is so integral to the Obama administration and to his role in particular.

Like a pro wrestling match, Americans have been encouraged to interpret events and actions that speak for themselves as something wholly other – specifically, in ways that benefit the administration’s narrative and future intentions. The wrestler isn’t really angry; he’s acting. He wasn’t thrown across the ring; the choreography just made it appear that way. And he isn’t really injured.

Unfortunately, the narrative and future intentions I mentioned, unlike those of the pro wrestler, are quite diabolical.

Read more here

Posted by Erik Rush in Columns

The Obama Method

by Dr. Jim Garrow

obama_darkness1. Screw the people.
2. Find a handy scapegoat for your actions.
3. Fire the scapegoat.
4. Express outrage: “I’m madder than hell”
5. Undermine anyone who gets in the way of your continued screwing of the people.
6. Express outrage if an investigation shows that you are the problem.
7. Change the name of the offending Department.
8. Throw an excessive amount of new money at “the problem.”
9. Continue to screw the people.
10. Have your pet media flunkies report on the vast improvement.
11. Tell the world how great you are.
12. Ignore any suggestions for improvement.
13. Continue to screw the people.
14. Put Marxists or Muslims in charge of the renewed screwing of Americans.
15. Throw money at the Muslims and have it redistributed to jihadists.
16. Blame right wing extremists for the jihadists.
17. Up the arming of the police state.
18. Raid the right wingers, Constitutionalists or Church goers.
19. Load the courts with anti- Constitution, pro-Marxist, pro-Muslim judges.
20. Charge and convict patriotic Americans.
21. Implement No-knock raids on Christians, Right Wingers, and Republicans
22. Shoot a few of them.
23. Conference together to decide when Martial Law is needed.
24. Cause a triggering event.
25. Declare martial law.
26. Round up dissidents and place them in re-training and FEMA camps.
27. Get the guillotines ready.
28. Re-hire the flunkies you fired and give them new titles and more money.
29. Pay the media to praise your administration for their insight.
30. Plead the Fifth.

Posted by Erik Rush in News

The conservative press: Too easy on Obama

obama_sshIt’s a foregone conclusion that the liberal press (mainstream media, establishment press) will never admit that our miserable excuse for a president even possesses normal human frailties, let alone gross character defects. Across the industry, I would say that this is largely rooted in a combination of ideological kinship, ignorance, fear, or top-down directives, depending on the case.

I’m also aware that some journalists and press outlets have been reticent to report negative information about Barack Obama over fears of being attacked for being racist, as inane a concept as this remains.

All of the above, of course, could apply in the practical sense to our elected officials as well, but we have grown to expect a certain level of duplicity on their part. This is not to justify their actions – particularly now, when some have bordered on treason – but the purpose of the press has always been in safeguarding our liberties through their function. This is largely why so many Americans have yet to come to the conclusion that the establishment press has become a subversive propaganda arm for the political left. People still trust them.

But what about the conservative press (the “new media” or “alternative press”)? Despite the power this body has been able to successfully wield, in the face of the grave and dangerous actions of the Obama administration and the deteriorating geopolitical landscape, too much of their coverage remains disappointingly superficial.

For example: I have noted that many conservative press outlets have gotten caught up in this theatrical bluster between President Obama and Russian President Vladimir Putin over the situation in Ukraine. This is no different a tack than that taken by their liberal media counterparts. It occurs to me that the interests of global peace as well as our domestic situation (with this president) might be better addressed by examining the actions Obama has taken to precipitate that crisis.

Read more…

I’m also aware that some journalists and press outlets have been reticent to report negative information about Barack Obama over fears of being attacked for being racist, as inane a concept as this remains.

All of the above, of course, could apply in the practical sense to our elected officials as well, but we have grown to expect a certain level of duplicity on their part. This is not to justify their actions – particularly now, when some have bordered on treason – but the purpose of the press has always been in safeguarding our liberties through their function. This is largely why so many Americans have yet to come to the conclusion that the establishment press has become a subversive propaganda arm for the political left. People still trust them.

But what about the conservative press (the “new media” or “alternative press”)? Despite the power this body has been able to successfully wield, in the face of the grave and dangerous actions of the Obama administration and the deteriorating geopolitical landscape, too much of their coverage remains disappointingly superficial.

For example: I have noted that many conservative press outlets have gotten caught up in this theatrical bluster between President Obama and Russian President Vladimir Putin over the situation in Ukraine. This is no different a tack than that taken by their liberal media counterparts. It occurs to me that the interests of global peace as well as our domestic situation (with this president) might be better addressed by examining the actions Obama has taken to precipitate that crisis.
Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2014/03/the-conservative-press-too-easy-on-obama/#oQZHYH1tjXfBKEto.99

Posted by Erik Rush in Columns