The Political Freakshow

And finally, now is the time when we see if reporters and pundits are more than shills for the president. The incompetency, and perhaps mendacity, of thee White House here is severe. The media’s glaring unwillingness to hold the president accountable for his actions can be at least partially remedied if they pursue the story vigorously. Even though Bush in good faith believed his intelligence community’s take on weapons of mass destruction, the left-leaning elites hollered, “Bush lied, people died!” But here we have dead Americans and an cover story in shreds. Why is there not, at a bare minimum, a call for answers? Isn’t this a top-of-the-fold issue? Well, my guess is that pundits and reporters alike in the mainstream media will do their best to soften and downplay the story.

Did Obama lie about the embassy attacks? - Right Turn - The Washington Post

How can you possibly compare this incident to Bush leading Americans into war over faulty intelligence—intelligence that members of the intelligence community were openly skeptical of at the time? Bush used the claim of WMDs—which was widely panned even at the time he made the claim—to embroil America in a war that lasted nearly a decade, cost upward of $750 billion, and resulted in the loss of somewhere between 60,000 and 1.1 million lives. In this scenario, 4 people died, and the president basically said after the fact it was an act of terror and we want to do a full investigation before we make any further statements and the whole thing was out in the open by the end of the month.

One situation is, “Bush lied, 60,000+ people died.” The other is, “4 people die, Obama maybe didn’t share everything he thought he might know.” Where is the comparison?

(via robot-heart-politics)

“Right Turn” was all I needed to see to know it was bullshit. Jennifer Rubin has a lot of nerve calling journalists shills when she’s a dictionary portrait of the word herself.

(via deadcrackerstorage)

My response to this BS: