The Right Opinion

Liberal Media Might as Well Wear Obama Buttons

By David Limbaugh · Sep. 14, 2012

The liberal media gave the ceaselessly political President Obama a pass for campaigning instead of performing his presidential duties when they were most needed, while they castigated Mitt Romney for being political when he was the only one of the two acting presidential.

To be sure, Obama is a political candidate for re-election to the presidency, but do we have to remind ourselves – as he often reminds us – that he also currently holds that office and that it includes duties that supersede his political activities?

After remaining silent for hours after the attacks in Egypt and Libya, Obama called a news conference to issue a brief statement on the matter and, in response to the first question, turned on his heels and walked off. Yet the liberal media, feigning outrage over Romney's alleged political exploitation, are neither curious nor critical about Obama's refusal to answer questions about the attacks, such as whether he considers them an act of war and what responses he is considering.

Instead of criticizing Obama for being political instead of presidential, of putting his personal interests above the interests of the nation he is charged to lead, the media ran interference for him, ignoring his dereliction of duty and turning their attention to the activities of Romney to manufacture the bogus storyline that he was the one being too political. What better way to detract from Obama's incompetence and politicking?

The media were lying in wait for Romney, who was eager to issue a public statement on the attacks but was trying earnestly not to campaign on the anniversary of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. Some “reporters” were even caught on a hot mic, conspiring to trip Romney up at his news conference.

But as a man who is running for the presidency, Romney had to make a statement on the matter. He owed it to the electorate. The media would have savaged him for fecklessness had he remained silent.

The media could hardly have argued with any credibility that a Romney statement would interfere with the official administration position, especially because the administration had been so reluctant to articulate a clear position. In any event, Romney's statement was measured, reasonable and reassuring to American voters who want to restore the presidency to someone who'll vigorously defend the United States and quit apologizing for it.

Romney properly expressed his outrage and disgust with the attacks – in a much more convincing tone, by the way, than President Obama would – when he clumsily read his own remarks without any hint of emotion. But Romney's alleged offense was in criticizing the administration for its statement “sympathizing with those who had breached our embassy in Egypt instead of condemning their actions” and for its mixed signals about whether to own or disavow the statement.

The statement from the U.S. Embassy centered on condemning “the continuing efforts by misguided individuals to hurt the religious feelings of Muslims.” It said, “We condemn efforts to offend believers of all religions.”

Many Americans were outraged that the administration, once again, was bending over backward to condemn those who criticize the Islamists instead of the Islamists themselves, who kill people who disagree with them. Sure, the statement came out before the attacks, but the administration persisted with the apologies after the attacks. It spoke as though the attacks had been in response to an anti-Muslim film, when they now appear to have been preplanned and coordinated for the anniversary of 9/11.

Not only that, but the very next day, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton took pains to condemn the video again, insisting that “the United States government had absolutely nothing to do with this video.” She continued, “We absolutely reject its content and message,” which she said was “disgusting and reprehensible.”

Well, that's fine, Mrs. Clinton, but where's the administration's outrage over the attacks themselves, and why are you obsessing over the film instead of the terrorists' atrocities? Why must you keep stressing that this nation honors the freedoms of religion and expression, when it goes without saying that we are more respectful of those rights than any other nation in history? Why do you register such heightened sensitivity toward slights to Islam and freely trample on the conscience rights and liberties of American Christians?

While the media gleefully and supportively report Obama's laughable exercise in projection in depicting Romney as one who shoots first and aims later, they ignore Obama's abdication of his foreign policy duties to free up his schedule for campaigning.

While Obama sends mixed messages on terrorism, which he dare not call by its name, and snubs Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and then lies about it, he soaks up the love in Las Vegas and at other campaign stops, all of which he may do, free of scrutiny, because of a press corps dedicated solely to getting him re-elected.



Jim in Alabama said:

Really! C'mon Governor Romney! There it is! Your very own Reaganism! "There you go again," is already taken. So just start answering some of the absurd questions with a question of your own. "Oh my goodness, did you leave your Obama for President button at home today?"

Friday, September 14, 2012 at 9:04 AM

rab in jo,mo replied:

That would be classic! Would that Mitt Romney would only do so. (George Romney would have.)

Friday, September 14, 2012 at 2:58 PM

Michael McNamara in Kentucky replied:

During the GOP debates, a talk radio host in Boston observed that even when he's right and he's angry, Mitt Romney still hits like a girl. So there's no chance at all that Smiling Mitt will ever disembowel Obama the way Reagan would have done -- the way Newt would have done.

But we've made our bed. It's Romney or nothing, now.

Friday, September 14, 2012 at 11:14 PM

Jim in Alabama said:

Better yet! Keep a pocket full of Obama Buttons to pass out to a few to the reporters with the most ridiculous questions!

Friday, September 14, 2012 at 9:13 AM

Tex Horn in Texas said:

Romney is to be commended for standing by his statement. This is an administration completely out of control. The State Department says one thing, the White House another. And Obama had the nerve to state that Romney/Ryan were "new to this" when talking about foreign policy. Well, I'd much rather have Romney at the controls, taking care of American interests, than the obviously deluded Obama/Clinton duo, who apparently only care about Muslim "feelings."

Friday, September 14, 2012 at 10:48 AM

Retired Sarge in Rockville, IN said:

NO $**T! I made the mistake of watching NBC Nightly News the other night (musta misplaced the remote) and everything Romney said was placed into a light of misguided and untimely criticism of Obama and crew (specifically, the killing of the Amercian ambassador to Libya and three others) and Obama's criticism of Romney's statements was held up as words from God Almighty! I'll NOT make that mistake again!

Friday, September 14, 2012 at 2:03 PM

Tom King in Kansas City MO replied:

Simply amazing, our supposed free press should all carry the busines name of PRAVDA.

Saturday, September 15, 2012 at 10:00 AM

Richard Ryan in Lamar,Missouri said:

David, nothing supersedes Obama`s political ambitions. Not this nations security, NOTHING! Nothing I could possibly put on this page would describe the contempt with which I hold that charlatan. The same goes for the media. Talk about a nest of vipers.

Friday, September 14, 2012 at 5:04 PM

Tod the tool guy in brooklyn ny said:

Islamists have found another "Salman Rushdie". Rushdie's 1988 book, the Satanic Verses, fanned the flames, of eternal militant muslim rage. Thomas Jefferson had to deal with the Barbary Pirates- way back- when, and now, our commander-in-chief, must deal with this crises. "Get to it, commander, before the blood trail grows cold!" "What's that, sir, the left-wing media is the pathway of Freedom?"

Saturday, September 15, 2012 at 6:30 AM

john in folsom said:

Media in the tank for obama. The middle east rioting is due to the fact that obama bragged 21times at the Dnc that he pulled the trigger to kill his brother osama. The little stupid but funny movie had nothing to do with this. Obama brags about his foreign policy all the killing and rioting is proof that his plan is working. Obama also wants just like his brothers want Death to America!!

Sunday, September 16, 2012 at 11:19 AM

Wayne in Hinesville, GA said:

You can't negotiate with fanatics from a position of weakness. Obama's apology tour showed the Middle East he is a weak President ( and I use the term President with a grain of salt). All he has done is to increase the hatred these "peace loving Muslims" have for America. Unfortunately, we have many people is this country who believe is it the United States fault for all the unrest and violence in the Arab world. They love nothing better than bashing their own country ala Jane Fonda. They have no concept what Islam is all about and have no interest in learning. One of the Imans here in the States stated during the Democratic Convention that if the Moslems in America ever became involved in politics they would take over the United States and make it a Caliphate. God help us if Obama is reelected!

Sunday, September 16, 2012 at 1:42 PM

Jackie the Jokeman in NYC said:

Biden 2016

Tuesday, September 18, 2012 at 1:03 AM