Reading like Pravda
Posted by aogTuesday, 24 September 2013 at 22:47 TrackBack Ping URL

A big recent story is that President Obama’s push for changing our health care system had its genesis in a throw away line from a speech. I’ve seen some counter evidence (such as Obama promoting government payer health care in 2003) but I want to wonder about the back story — why was this story published?

While Politico isn’t as in the tank as say the New York Times it certainly has a strong pro-Obama bias and I have little doubt this piece, which isn’t really news, was published with some political purpose in mind. Are they trying to distance Obama from the now obvious to all but the totally blinkered train wreck? Shift the blame to the Democratic Congress that actually wrote the legislation? I call it “POR-care” because it was far more then House Speaker Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Reid who created and passed it, with Obama mainly standing around trying to look involved between golf outings.

The article certainly does not, in my view, reflect well on Obama that he would make such a major change on what’s basically a whim. It could be Politico trying to distance itself from the debacle. But I do think it’s neat that with a free press, one still has to read it as the Soviets did Pravda.

Comments — Formatting by Textile
erp Wednesday, 25 September 2013 at 07:59

There are many ways to skin a cat just as there are many ways to destroy the greatest* country since historical records have been kept. To that end, it’s from each according to his abilities … Obama has only his enhanced melanin, tall slender posture and other-earthly arrogance going for him, Pelosi keeps getting re-elected by the gays in her district, Reid is the quintessential dealing making thug and the rest of the left all have their own reasons for getting on board.

IMO they are either weak-minded idealists without the ability to get out of the rain on their own or power-mad egomaniacs who think they know how to organize us all for our own and the planet’s good.

*in terms of individual freedom and opportunity for all.

Annoying Old Guy Monday, 30 September 2013 at 12:30

This article makes a key point about how the Clintons can intimidate what passes for journalism these days and asks “if they can do this while out of office, what happens if Hillary Clinton becomes President?”

erp Monday, 30 September 2013 at 16:10

Remember the FBI files they took with them when they left the WH? They’ve put them to good use and long before technology made so easy anyone could do it.

Annoying Old Guy Monday, 30 September 2013 at 23:16


And we can be sure the “criticizing a woman politician is misogynist” will be used heavily.

Post a comment