Observations: The QandO Podcast for 30 Sep 12
This week, Bruce, Michael, and Dale talk about the election.
The direct link to the podcast can be found here.
As a reminder, if you are an iTunes user, don’t forget to subscribe to the QandO podcast, Observations, through iTunes. For those of you who don’t have iTunes, you can subscribe at Podcast Alley. And, of course, for you newsreader subscriber types, our podcast RSS Feed is here. For podcasts from 2005 to 2010, they can be accessed through the RSS Archive Feed.
Excellent show, guys, as always.
But I wonder a little at one topic… the reason the real story on Obama hasn’t been told by the press…
I wonder, frankly, if a majority of, shall we say “less than politically attached” Americans, would think that such reporting was fantastic and beyond the pale. So fantastic in fact that they wouldn’t believe it… Particularly after years of the mainstream press telling them what a great guy Obama was, and what great things he was doing, how he was lowering the ocean levels etc..
I suppose that such a dramatic turnaround from the hype to the lowdown truth of the matter would strain credulity in such people’s minds.  And who could blame them?
Then too, it has become clear to me within the last few months that the suppose it mainstream press is finding itself increasingly challenged playing the role of Obama cheerleader. This, particularly, given some of the stuff that has been coming out lately, such as fast and furious, Benghazi, and so on. The quandary for the press at this point is how to begin telling the truth again, without being called a liar either then, or now. It becomes an issue of credibility which of course is needed to maintain their cushy jobs. (grin)
At the same time, the issue for us, as in, we Americans, is do the politically unattached as I’ve described them believe the truth when it’s finally offered up to them from Obama’s former cheerleaders? History would seem to suggest that they will not. After all, as Mark Twain observed, it’s a lot easier to fool someone that it is to convince them that they’ve been fooled.
It’s my view that the truth of the matter will not fully be told, much less absorbed by those unattached until such time as Obama is out of office. If ever. In any event, the whole truth of this thing will never come out before the next election. The press certainly doesn’t have the stones for it, and I have my doubts that Romney/ Ryan does, either.
Could be wrong about that, but at the moment, I doubt it.
Yeah, good points. The media is caught in a nasty quandry of their own making, and of course I have no sympathy whatsoever, but they are rather like the cat that climbed too high into the tree. No easy way down.
The idea that they are afraid they won’t be believed if they tell the whole truth is intriguing. I’d never really considered that as a possibility. I just thought the groupthink made them all nervous about being the first to break out of the bubble. Â
I wonder if there are a few that perceive this situation as the opportunity to make a name. That is, once the dam breaks on some of these subjects, there might be at least a few who didn’t get too overly invested in Obama boosting, and see a chance to make a mark with some real news.
Pingback: When the truth is too fantastic, print the lie - BitsBlog
Inflation at 1.6% with bank rates at close to zero percent, means that savers lose money each year. Compound interest works in reverse. too, right?
Pingback: Observations: The QandO Podcast for 30 Sep 12 | Liberal Whoppers
Heheh… Kinda like Kim Mitchell, I suppose…
Â
Yeah, Ive no doubt there’s a lot of not wanting to be the first to cross the line… a line so many are unwilling to admit even exists. And I have no doubt at all in my mind this is part of it. Being the first has a tendency to carry a certain stigma on the playground that is the media today. Notice the times we’ve seen the National Enquirer and like publications breaking stories… it’s a safer venue for the mainstream media for such because such sources can be more easily downplayed, and disregarded, but they provide an opening in the armor for the subject to be broached on the world political stage. Of course, once the armor is breached, the investigation began in earnest without nearly the social consequences to the investigators.
I’d suggest too at least part of that phenom is that so many in the MSM have a personal, and emotional investment in the left… and this has been well proven, time and again. It’s hard for them to admit that their horse isn;t running well, and actually investigating and reporting on it’s misdeeds would be an admission not only of the misdeeds themselves, but that their personal estimates were so very far off. Nobody likes to admit they’ve backed the wrong horse.
Â
As for your original point as regards not being believed by the general public when these reports come forward, I will be honest with you; my inspiration for the idea comes from an old John Wayne film. Have you ever seen “the man who shot liberty valance”?
Â
Never saw Liberty Valence, though it’s been sitting in a John Wayne collection I bought five or six years ago. I’ll have to dig it out. I know it’s supposed to be pretty good.
Well, you’ll see what I mean, when you see it. Essentially, if the truth runs against the legend, print the legend.
That’s particularly true when it’s the press itself that helped to create that legend.
Extended thoughts;
Has that line already been crossed? Univision, as I think it was Dale who mentoned, has already been going after Obama pretty hard on the subjects our own press should have been. And I note Pat Goodell is starting to chide the meainstream a bit on the matter.
Â
The question becomes, will this stuff break open wide enough to swallow Obama and company by election day, I wonder? The reasons for the question are straightforward enough and are fairly well covered in my first response.