Skip to comments.Media Obsessed with Watergate, Not Fast and Furious
Posted on 06/22/2012 7:20:26 AM PDT by marktwain
If you want to see a liberal media member's head explode, compare Fast and Furious to Watergate. If you want to see an entire newsroom freak out, say that Fast and Furious is worse than Watergate.
The Activist Old Media has spent this month celebrating the 40th Anniversary of Watergate. Make no doubt about it, they are celebrating. They worship at the alter of Woodward and Bernstein for two reasons. 1) They took down a Republican President. 2) The media broke the story. Nothing can replace this perfect storm in their minds. Those are also the reasons why the media will not give Fast and Furious the attention it deserves.
With a Democrat in the White House and his reelection on the line, this is the absolute worst time for a scandal like this to blow up. The story of Eric Holder and the contempt vote must run after a hot day in June, as it was treated by ABC World News Tonight.
Also, since bloggers broke this story, the Activist Old Media cannot take ownership and create shrines to fellow "journalists." CBS says that Sharon Atkisson broke the story, but it was on the 'net before it went to the Network. Certainly, Atkisson has done a great job on this story so good that she was yelled at by Holder's lackeys. She was the first network news reporter to do the story, partly because the other networks have been historically absent on it, until now. But, no network "broke" this story, as they claim. It's a brave new world out there on the internet, and the Activist Old Media is doing everything it can to ignore and diminish that fact. Blind by choice.
There are many elements that make Fast and Furious #WorseThanWatergate. Brian Terry's death and
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
Another effort by MSM to divert attention from/protect the real problem, and Nixon is always a favorite target.
I was puzzled to see all the celebrations about the 40th anniversary of the Watergate break-in. Woodward and Bernstein were out there together on various programs.
Of course, any comparisons to any other scandals, current or past, was not allowed to be spoken of. Any comparison to presidential abuses of power, current or past, was censored out of the Watergate celebrations.
Naturally we don’t want to talk about what’s going on today. Instead, we want to talk about something that happened 40 years ago. That’s our media for you.
Time to change the tagline.
Old media = no ratings
(They are thinking) Remember the good old days of Watergate when we controlled the media, we controlled the narrative. We were on top of the world then!
It is well known that most of the media leans liberal, but I think a bigger public effort should be made in questioning their motivation for wanting Obama to have four more years to tear away at the fabric of America.
There is a pulitzer award out there for the person with enough guts to take on nobammy. No one was killed in Watergate! Libs will give up a chance at fame to protect their a$$hole-in-chief? That’s just nuts.
And don’t forget that, by taking down Nixon, they were able to slaughter 3 million non-white people in Southeast Asia. That’s 1000 times better than what Democrats could do in the South with blacks during Jim Crow.
Pulitzer awards have always been reserved for those who advance the "progressive" agenda. Conservatives need not apply.
The MSM routinely puts advancing the "progressive" agenda ahead of profits. There is a real hunger in the country for news and stories that are not spun from the *progressive* viewpoint, but the MSM would rather lose market share than publish them.
I first became aware of this back in the 1970s when I asked an NRA administrator why the NRA did not get their message out. His answer: The NRA tried to buy advertising time, but the networks refused to sell it to them.
We all know that Watergate was the liberal wet dream—it brought down a hated Republican President who had just handed them a humiliating landslide defeat. The mainstream media today is obviously carrying the water for Obama. In 1972, however, the nightly news and daily papers were the only conduits of information. There was time for the media to turn a bungled two bit burglary into the greatest political scandal ever. In 2012, most people have cell phones with cameras, and events unfold on the internet instantaneously as they happen. In 1972 there was no opposing voice to put Watergate in context— there was no internet, no 24/7 tv news, and no Rush. There was only Walter Cronkite. Liberals despise free speech and an informed populace, so they naturally long for the days when they had total control of the media.
Well stated. Watergate was a media coup.
Nixon should not have been pushed out of office for Watergate, but should have been impeached for creating the EPA and instituting Wage and Price Controls.
According to Steve Doocy this morning, ABC News last night did not have anything on Fast and Furious or the President’s claim of executive privilege in the case. Zero seconds.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.