Media Make Democrats Unique

Here is a recently published insight from columnist H.A. Goodman:

Millions of Democrats are voting for a presidential candidate linked to an FBI criminal investigation. These voters either don’t know there’s been a year-long FBI investigation of Clinton’s emails, don’t care, or would vote for Clinton even [sic] she faced Espionage Act indictments.  … This state of affairs would never take place in any other leading democracy, but American politics is unique. (emphasis added)

Goodman acknowledges the obvious, yes, but without a requisite specificity. For American politics is not so unique as is Democrat Party politics; more specifically, Democrat politicians and liberal orthodoxy as portrayed by America’s liberal media (a.k.a. ‘mainstream’ media) establishment; the very media who have shielded Mrs. Clinton, much as they did her husband before her, from the scrutiny and skepticism regularly applied to Republican politicians and conservative causes.

Establishment media have helped the Democrat party herd Hillary supporters toward a cliff-side state of sheer delusion, toward believing her corruption, demagoguery and apparent criminality ought not inhibit her candidacy for the White House.

This is one reason a history of America’s 2016 election cycle, and of modern American politics, will not be complete unless it includes a detailed examination of the role America’s mass media have played and the impact they have had.

Advertisements

Era of Clinton 2.0

It was not so very long ago, the 1980s in fact, that liberals were fond of saying … Those in higher positions of power must be held to a higher standard of conduct. Eschewing legally objective standards of behavior, they employed this political trope to attack officials in the Reagan Administration, and did so with considerable abandon, even glee.

Then came the 1990s, and the Era of Clinton with its abundance of scandalous behavior. That was also when Democrats began suggesting … No one should be above the law, but no one should be below the law either. Quite a change in tune. Liberal media (a.k.a. ‘mainstream’ media) hounds picked up that tune and followed it dutifully, until they had another Republican president, i.e. George W. Bush, to bash.

Now we face the Era of Clinton 2.0, and already liberals entertain the notion that some higher standard is in order, however not as applied to Mrs. Clinton’s behavior; rather to those who might dare hold her accountable for her various indiscretions while Secretary of State. Liberal champion Ron Fournier has suggested, for example, that a “higher bar” must be cleared in order to bring criminal charges against someone, such as Mrs. Clinton, who is running for president.

Meanwhile, former Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives, Dennis Hastert, makes his media ‘perp’ walk. It is a tour of public humiliation, apparently well deserved, as he is held to account for past crimes and indiscretions. If a former Speaker of the House is not above the law, then neither should be a former Secretary of State. Suggestions from the liberal media that those holding Mrs. Clinton accountable must meet a higher standard — while Mrs. Clinton, by implication, is held to a lesser one — take us full circle, in a way that is bizarre and brazenly hypocritical.