Posted on 11/15/2012 9:10:12 AM PST by cap10mike
In June, the Washington Post celebrated the 40th anniversary of the biggest scoop in journalistic history — Watergate. Looking back on it, the Post has every right to crow. The story was so huge that every political scandal since has been labeled with the word “gate” tagged onto the end of it. However, the Post should also consider the adage, “You’re only as good as your last story,” because there’s a bigger one out there for the taking, if it only had the courage to pursue it. That story is, of course, the attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya.
(Excerpt) Read more at bizpacreview.com ...
I’d prefer Mitch Rapp.
They’d be vilified by the left FOR LIFE. Death threats against them if they took down Obama. Likely a career killer for anyone not wanting to work at Fox.
Fortunately there’s now a sex scandal. So the drive by media will have to pay attention.
The problem with the media to day is their judgement and outrage isn’t based on right and wrong, but on what party the person belongs to... If the New York Times shills find a Republican jay walking they reach down and discover a pair...
We do like hell! They kept deep throat’s identity a secret until Mark Felt’s death because they didn’t want it to be known that their “informant” was a disgruntled, jealous, and vengeful government employee who was pissed that Nixon passed him over for head of the FBI after Hoover’s death.
Bob Woodward’s books are worthless tripe.
The media is doing nothing different than it did during the Watergate era. Their job is to take down Republicans and protect Democrats. Woodward and Bernstein are still around, and defended to the death every charge against Obama and Clinton before. To expect the MSM to investigate Obama in the same way they would Nixon, Reagan, or W is a pipe dream. They will even move the goalposts while a story develops. I remember when the whole Monica thing hit. Sam Donaldson was speaking with Cokey Roberts on ABC prior to the blue dress. Both said that if the charges were true Clinton was done and would have to resign, After the blue dress both changed their tune on the dime and defended Slick to the death.
The media is doing nothing different than it did during the Watergate era. Their job is to take down Republicans and protect Democrats. Woodward and Bernstein are still around, and defended to the death every charge against Obama and Clinton before. To expect the MSM to investigate Obama in the same way they would Nixon, Reagan, or W is a pipe dream. They will even move the goalposts while a story develops. I remember when the whole Monica thing hit. Sam Donaldson was speaking with Cokey Roberts on ABC prior to the blue dress. Both said that if the charges were true Clinton was done and would have to resign, After the blue dress both changed their tune on the dime and defended Slick to the death.
An interesting concept. At the same time, we realize that even the real Woodward and Bernstein weren't "Woodward and Bernstein." Their primary cause didn't appear to be the truth, patriotism, or even good journalism. They seem to have invented a lot of what they wrote (remember "factoids"?), and were following what Joe Sobran called The Hive in targeting Nixon because the Left never forgave him for nailing St. Alger Hissssss in 1948.
What we need is a group of truth-tellers to help take down our own little Mussolini.
Woodward might....forget Bernstein!!!
Please! You have to be joking W&B are a couple of the biggest hyped-up excuses for what one calls what passes for journalism that have ever existed. Woodward is a simp that trades on his notariety, and Bernstein - well, God knows what the hell he’s up to now....
They took a mole hill and blew it up into a mountain along with a bunch of colluding MSM ideologues. They are actually lightweight compared to the machinations of the Democrat Tyranny Regime now days.
RIGHT ON! If anyone in the media herd dared to go hard at Obama they would be putting not just their career, but their social world on the line.
They admired and loved the campus radicals who today dominate the Establishment.
The likes of Woodward, Bernstein, Bradlee, and Graham today are the 1960s Marxist-Alinsky campus radical, psycho spoiled brats and their ideological issue whom the real Woodward, Bernstein, Bradlee, and Graham admired.
I remember.
The 1960s Marxist-Alinsky campus radical, psycho spoiled brats were celebrated in the establishment MSM as the most intelligent generation ever!. They are now arguably that very establishment that praised them and they hold themselves and their ideological issue in even higher regard.
You are not going to find a Woodward and Bernstein in the MSM among the skid marks on Journalism's shorts.
BTW.. on Watergate, can anyone name one thing that Nixon did that JFK and LBJ did not do?
I can name one thing that the MSM did in Nixon's administration that they did not do in JFK's and LBJ's administrations.. they asked questions!
And the left also, after Nixon’s horrific (to them) 49 state landlide, became determined that any repulican nominee going forward was to be repudiated, despised and destroyed. Only Reagan beat them, because he had the people behind him and they were horrified again in both 1980 and 1984. 1988 was a landslide too but Bush was a go-along moderate who could be duped, then detroyed in four years (and was).
And since, the pressure has been on republican nominees to never, ever run as a conservative or all hell and damnation will be brought down upon you. What the moderate nominees since Reagan haven’t realized is that, hell and damnation will be brought anyway, no matter what, so you might as well stand for something. But moderates don’t stand for anything. And conservatives have been convinced that running as conservatives leads to political oblivion, the examples of ‘80, ‘84, 00, and ‘04 notwithstanding. Yet they’re more than happy to follow the examples of ‘76, ‘92, ‘96, and ‘08.
Does anyone here believe Woodward and Bernstein told the truth?
Then, how did GWB get away with running as a conservative and still winning? Twice?
I'll grant you that GWB may not have been the conservative he claimed to be, but there were many conservative aspects to his administration. Respect for the military, respect for life, etc.
Indeed, during the 2000 campaign, I was convinced that GWB was the 3rd most conservative candidate to run for the Presidency in my lifetime -- after Barry Goldwater and Ronald Reagan. Not my idea of "conservative", to be sure, but still "more conservative" than his dad -- or Bob Dole or Richard Nixon, e.g.
Fat chance..they are libs.
Do you really think a content Nixon loyalist would have "blown the whistle"? Enablers are rarely a good source of incriminating evidence.
Bush was from Texas and knew how republicans thought, even though he didn’t think the same way (although he was more with the conservatives than his father was). He also solidly had the evangelicals behind him, who he heard from in spades, which probably blunted the more moderate to liberal advice that Romney and McCain probably got.
Bush first term was very conservative. Once he was safely re-elected, he started to screw us all. Harriet Myers, Alberto Gonzalez, Katrina, capitulating to the Colin Powell view of the war on terror, talking about clmate change, going along with Tarp, etc. The moderates and liberals wore him down. People like Reagan and Gingrich and Delay (and even Nixon) relished the political fight and went charging in, instead of retreating.
We don’t lack for reporters with integrity!
It’s just that the MSM won’t hire any of them, so 75% of the public never hears them!
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.