By PHK
Would the American media please wake up? Sorting out fact from regurgitating campaign-generated fiction would be really nice for a change.
Isn’t it the job of the Fourth Estate to play detective, to find out and expose whoever is behind this week’s vicious personal attacks on Michelle Obama or, for that matter, unearth the origins of vicious slurs on the character of any presidential contender, his or her spouse or family whenever and wherever they occur? This character assassination stuff needs to come to a screeching halt. To stop it, the perpetrators and their motives need to be brought to the light of day and the attention of the public. Right now.
If we still have a semblance of responsible, investigative media left in this country, its reporters and editors should be first out of the starting gate to investigate this and any other questionable stories and report them – sooner rather than later.
Pride in America turned into a negative character assassination attack
Pray tell: How can a positive statement about pride in America be so facilely turned into a negative attack on a person’s character as just happened for the first time to Ms. Obama this week? Why isn’t the MSM asking behind-the-scenes questions about the accusation’s origins and purpose? Or is it, and have I just missed something?
It’s possible, I suppose, but doubtful that such slurs against Michelle Obama are coming from the Clinton folk. I can’t prove they aren’t, but it sure doesn’t look that way to me given the media outlets in which the attack articles have thus far appeared. It’s even more doubtful that they originated from the bowels of the Democratic Party.
Could these attacks, therefore, come from the Republicans? Who else, after all, would have an interest in tearing down a leading Democratic candidate?
Might these sub rosa charges be generated by Republican political operatives seeking to sow dissention among the Democratic ranks as well as probing for vulnerabilities in the Obama campaign now that John McCain has the Republican nomination all but sewn up and Obama, not Clinton, may become his opponent in the fall?
What is the goal and who is behind the attacks?
Or might the goal be to weaken Obama so that Clinton – who polls show is supposedly more vulnerable in a McCain match-up – becomes the Democratic candidate instead of a possibly harder to defeat Obama?
Could the slurs against Michelle Obama, therefore, originate from within the McCain campaign itself, be orchestrated by the National Republican Campaign Committee or, alternatively, spring from a right wing fringe movement seeking a power-broker role for itself when election time roles around?
The two attack-dog stories smearing Ms. Obama appeared yesterday in the usual conservative suspects: the small circulation but influential right wing mouthpieces Commentary and the Weekly (Daily) Standard. “Coincidentally,” these stories simultaneously featured prominently on the popular Republican-oriented Real Clear Politics website thus giving the story far greater exposure, credibility and perhaps even its perpetrators’ hoped for soaring wings.
Yet as far as I know, Commentary, the Weekly Standard and RCP are not mouthpieces for the Christian conservative wing of the Republican Party. That, most likely, rules Mike Huckabee out.
I can only deduce, therefore, that the personal attacks on Ms. Obama are much more likely to be closely related to the McCain camp than to the other candidates on either side. Add to this the fact that the two recent anti-Michelle Obama articles both concluded by extolling the virtues of the "experienced" John McCain. As does Marie Cocco’s Washington Post column which ran on RCP on the same day and in which she even more blatantly fawned over said "experienced" candidate. Hmmmm. I suppose Cocco should be complimented, at least, for leaving out the underhanded anti- Michelle Obama scum.
Coincidences do happen. . . but
Coincidences happen. But it seems to me these particular “coincidences” should also raise numerous red flags among seasoned, skeptical political reporters and editors. How many more stories along the Commentary and Weekly Standard lines are we likely to see before this nasty little piece of distorted disinformation is retired? What else will come down the pike in its wake?
It would certainly be nice if the mainstream media would explore the possibility of a McCain camp campaign to weaken Obama via an underhanded and untruthful attack on his wife’s character while simultaneously puffing up the “virtues” of its own contender.
I’m not naïve. I realize democratic politics did not originate with the angels – but it doesn’t mean this kind of behavior should be condoned and the perpetrators allowed off Scott-free.
Will some enterprising political reporter please help and prove me wrong or right? Seems to me those of us rank-and-file voters have the right to know.