Skip to comments.Media Sets Narrative to Cover for the Democrats' Disastrous Foreign Policy (Long article)
Posted on 09/13/2012 2:58:48 PM PDT by Kaslin
RUSH: I'm trying to put my finger on what bothers me the most. There's something that's been gnawing at me. I always try to not get caught up. It's very hard. It's hard to avoid this. The narrative. I was talking about the narrative when the program started. The daily media narrative. There is one. We wonder how they can all end up using the word "gravitas." We wonder how they can all end up using the same words. We heard it with Jan Crawford and Ari Shapiro setting the narrative. Grab audio sound bite 26. I'm sorry to be so scattered here, folks. I literally cannot keep up with my brain here. There's too much. I can't keep up with my own brain. I'm sorry if it sounds disjointed, but I get a neuron of a thought and I want to launch and explain it 'cause I'm afraid I'll forget it if I set it aside. Here, grab the sound bite. This is again the coordination, two reporters, one CBS, one NPR. They are setting the narrative of the day. This is before they've asked Romney a single question.
Open mic: Press coordinating questions for Romney "no matter who he calls on we're covered"
CRAWFORD: Thats the question.
SHAPIRO: Do you have any regrets?
CRAWFORD: Yeah, thats the question. I would even say - I would just say, do you regret your question?
SHAPIRO: Your question? Your statement?
CRAWFORD: I mean, your statement. Not even the tone...
CRAWFORD:...because then he can go off on
SHAPIRO: And then if he does, I think we should follow up and say, "But this morning your aides were continuing to send..."
CRAWFORD: Who he calls on, were covered on the one question that...
SHAPIRO: Do you stand by your statement or do you regret your statement?
RUSH: So the answers that Romney would give to any of those questions are irrelevant. They don't care what he's gonna say. They don't care what his ideas are. They don't care what his policy is. They don't care a whit. The only point that they have here is to set up a narrative all day long where Romney's the problem; where Romney spoke too soon; Romney's unpresidential; Romney's unqualified; Romney's this, Romney's that. That's the objective, and that is something that happens every day in the media, every day. They don't have to collaborate, although we now know that they do. They don't have to. They all think alike. They all have the same objective. They are Democrats with bylines. It's very hard to avoid this narrative each and every day.
But there's something much larger than these individual incidents at our embassy in Egypt and what happened in Benghazi, and that is arrived at by asking why are these two things happening? Well, what's the media narrative on that? Well, the media narrative is that there's this video out there, or movie, on YouTube that makes fun of the Prophet Mohammed. Okay, that's it. That explains everything. That explains the militants, that explains the anger, and guess what? That does make it our fault, and there you have the narrative. It's our fault because we have a Constitution. It's our fault because we got a First Amendment. It's our fault because we've got uncontrollable extremist kooks, hatemongers, whatever the left wants to say. And they always all happen to be conservatives.
When, in reality, that's not why any of this is happening at all. This is not happening because of a movie. It's not happening because of a YouTube video, or whatever it is. It is happening for a reason. This is what I've been trying to get my arms around, and I finally succeeded. It's been right in front of me face, and you know it and I know it. This is happening because we have a disaster as a president. This is happening because American foreign policy as a whole is imploding. We have somebody in charge of American foreign policy and his secretary of state, Mrs. Clinton, who have a politically correct conflict resolution "United States is always at fault" worldview. That is how you get Obama apologizing all over the world shortly after he takes office. That's why Obama bows to all these foreign leaders. It's why he went to Cairo and made this speech.
The assumption is that George Bush ruined our reputation around the world. Why? 'Cause George Bush was a cowboy. What's that mean? It means Bush stood up for America. Bush said, "You're either with us or you're against us." Oh, no, that's not conflict resolution 101. Oh, no. That's not fair. Oh, no, that's not justice. Because, you see, the United States doesn't deserve to win all the time, folks. We've won way too many times in the view of Mrs. Clinton and Barack Obama, both from the Alinsky school. We've been victorious way too often, for way too many decades. And because of these unjust victories we have become unjustly wealthy, and we have become unjustly powerful. It hasn't been fair; it hasn't been right.
The Democrats love to make victims of people in this country. The whole world is victims of the United States. That's why we're where we are. We have a foreign policy that is predicated on the belief that this country is guilty or has had committed atrocities. I'll pull back and not say "crimes." But in their view, we have a country that has committed atrocities, that has stolen, that has purloined, that has imposed our will on poor people that had no choice and no power to reject us. We don't do things for good. We do things for selfish reasons involving wealth and power.
And so now it's the job of Barack Obama, even before he's making the speech in Berlin, even before he becomes president, after he becomes president, his mission, therefore, in his convoluted mind and also Mrs. Clinton's, is to tell the rest of the world... they assume the rest of the world agrees with them about everything. So the way that we will have peace is for Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton to essentially blame us, as they do. And once they do that, so goes the thinking in conflict resolution 101, once we tell our enemies that we understand that we have been at fault at times in the past, they will thus be mollified, and because of the power of the personality of Barack Obama and the bigness of his willingness to admit our fault and complicity in atrocities for 200-plus years, that they will stand down.
It is a blatantly ignorant understanding of tyrants, even though they aspire to be tyrants in their own way. It is a blatant misunderstanding of evil. It is an absorption in the myth that the power of their goodness and decency can overcome all this evil, primarily with their words and with their speeches. All they have to do is acknowledge that we have been imperfect. Obama did this. A ChiCom guy came to town early on in Bam's regime, and some Obama spokesman was sent out there to tell the ChiCom guy, "Hey, you know, we know we haven't been exactly fair with you all these years." It's exactly how they think and what they do. Well, what has this resulted in? Where are we?
United States foreign policy is in collapse. Not because of a movie. Not because of some kook preacher somewhere. Not because of some fake movie producer, as it turns out. United States foreign policy is in collapse because of who's in charge of it. And that would be Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton and all the underlings that they have appointed who think likewise, who think as they do. How can any of this be happening, after Obama made his Cairo speech? In his mind, it shouldn't be. In Hillary's mind it shouldn't be. They can't believe this is happening. I guarantee you. They don't understand.
Dianne Feinstein -- I got a sound bite -- she doesn't understand. (imitating Feinstein) "How can the Libyans do this to us after we saved them?" She is a senator. She's on the Foreign Relations Committee, and she doesn't have any idea about the realities of the world in which this country thrives and lives and how we're viewed. They really thought that by us going in, flexing our muscles -- and, by the way, when Obama flexes his muscles and spreads American might, then it's good, it's okay, because his intentions are decent and honorable. He's a good liberal. He's got a big heart. He's got a lot of empathy. He cares, all that blah, blah, rotgut stuff.
So we get rid of Khadafy. We make the assumption that because we hate Khadafy, everybody in Libya hates Khadafy. Well, not everybody hated Khadafy. A lot of people loved Khadafy. A lot of people didn't like the fact that we came in there and "cowboyed" up. People say, "What the hell did Libya do?" The Libyans say, "What did we do? We got rid of our nukes. What the hell did we do?" Obama saw it as an easy victory.
He wants to establish himself as having foreign policy gonads. He's got guts, courage. He picks on somebody he can walk all over, hiding behind the United Nations. Do it with drones, do it with whatever. Big, tough guy! All of sudden, they kill our ambassador. There's stuff out now, too, that he was sodomized prior to his death. Yep. Sorry to mention that. Dianne Feinstein doesn't understand it. "We were so nice! We liberated 'em."
The worst President - so reminiscent of Carter - an enemy in the White House. Does America have a death wish?
Foreign Policy ? What Foreign Policy.
Here we have evidence of the media colluding together to get their hits in on one of the candidates (while letting the other WHO IS COMMANDER IN CHIEF skate by without questioning).
At what point can we expect collusion between the DNC and liberal moderators of the 2012 presidential (and VP) debates?
And would it be criminally actionable? A rigged debate is a rigged election.
In 2008, there was suspicion that Hillary Clinton was having access to debate questions prior to the debates.
And certainly there have been Democrat plants in the "town hall" forums.
We are living in a Stalinist/Orwellian nightmare.
Read, then post.
I’m just curious about the media....how many dead Americans will it take before they start being real journalists and go after this incompetent administration? Would they do it if their brother was one of the Americans killed in Libya? Stealing a line from an old movie.....”What price silence journalists?...What price silence?”
How are the delusions of Rice any different form Obama here?