If you had any doubt about it, there should be no doubt in your mind now.
The Mainstream media is biased. The Big Three, like a soft and fluffy version of the Soviet Pravda, have propped up their little Barack Obama and his shrewish successor Hillary “Hexes, Lies, and Emails on Tape” Clinton.
The latest, most vicious example of this distortion? President Obama’s tepid, non-existence response to the floods sweeping Louisiana. 31 inches of rain fell in 15 hours, and that was a tally from one week ago!
No, this is not a hurricane, nor is it climate change (sit down, Bill Nye the Humanist Guy). This is Mother Nature running her ragged course.
Are these floods really that bad, though?
CNN, the Clinton News Network, could not spin the downward spiral of this disaster, “Louisiana flood: Worst US disaster since Hurricane Sandy, Red Cross says”:
“Thousands of people in Louisiana have lost everything they own and need our help now.”
13 people have died, and 7,000 more have fled to shelters.
No Obama until – Tuesday.
Where was the President? How about his entourage?
Donald Trump, the despised anti-Establishment Republican candidate, showed up to help. Where’s Jeb? How about Lindsey Graham? What about Romney?
How about Hillary Clinton? Fundraising. How about Jill Stein or Gary Johnson? Too busy trying to reach 15% in the polls for debates that they will never participate in.
But again – Where is President Obama?
The media aren’t asking, and don’t care!
What a storm of a difference from eleven years ago.
I remember watching night after night as the marginalized media smeared George W. Bush for his not-so immediate response to the destruction waged by Hurricane Katrina in 2005.
Maybe the media were giving Bush the full flush. After all, he won re-election with more votes and more states than in 2000—popular as well as electoral. He won over 44% of Hispanics, not by hispandering, but by demonstrating a clear resolve to defend our nation’s borders from international threats.
Yes, I know that Bush was excoriated like no one else for his reckless spending, for undermining the wonders of a solid Republican majority in the Congress.
But at least he kept us safe.
Last year, the ten year anniversary of the Katrina catastrophe, the Times was still slamming Bush and his executive staff for their terrible job. Check the listings here if you do not believe me.
In 2005, the media headlines were relentless against Bush:
When will we see this headline about Obama?
The New York Times even smeared W.’s mother Barbara Bush:
Meaning “Better off as evacuees, without homes”?
What did she say?
What I'm hearing, which is sort of scary, is they all want to stay in Texas. Everyone is so overwhelmed by the hospitality."
"And so many of the people in the arena here, you know, were underprivileged anyway," she said, "so this is working very well for them."
They were better off in Texas, of course, away from the destruction in Louisiana!
What has the New York Times reported about Obama?
How about “Deliberate Attempt to Seem Compassionate, Playing Politics”?
He was still on vacation! He was still playing golf!
And the Washington Post? How did they respond to Obama’s aloof arrogance?”
[I]t speaks to Obama's unique and long-lasting commitment to not playing by a core rule of modern politics: making at least some decisions based on "how it looks" and/or "how it will play."
No, it merely shows what an arrogant, selfish ass Obama is, with neither principle nor compassion for the sufferings of others. We have seen this sickening sitcom before. The Middle East is overrun with terrorists because of his “Don’t Do Stupid Stuff” foreign policy. “Let’s hit the Links”! Ferguson, Baltimore, Milwaukee go up in flames. “Fore!” Venezuela has bread lines, Greece is going broke, Puerto Rico defaults on its debt: “Hole in One!”
Barack Obama, the Golfer in chief.
Yes, George W. Bush did a fly-over the Louisiana devastation in 2005. He later got down and visited with the ravaged communities. Let’s not forget that Bush called terror what it is, and stood with a destroyed Manhattan community overwhelmed by the 9-11 jihad.
Of course, none of that would be enough for a bitter media and Hollywood elite.
Who can forget the inimitably obtuse Kanye West, a gold digger if there ever was one, declaring on national television: “President Bush doesn’t care about black people.”
Fast forward 11 years, and the reading public is still asking: “Does President Obama care about black people?”
Former State Senator Elbert Guillory denounced the President’s absence.
Breitbart News reports (the only news source that bothered to ask):
It’s difficult to understand why he could not break from his vacation and his golfing and come to Louisiana.”
Guillory refused to stop there:
Under [Obama’s] administration he bailed out the banks, he bailed out Wall Street, but Black unemployment is the highest it has been since the Great Depression,” he said.
“More than 60 per cent of our students, sometimes as many as 90 in urban areas, cannot read and write at grade level.”
If President Obama has done right by the black community, why would a Marxist thugocracy like Black Likes Matter have to erupt on the streets of Ferguson, Washington DC, and Los Angeles?
How can we explain the riots of Baltimore, where every authority and featured figure was black, a Democrat, or both? If President Obama has done a good job for black folks, why?
It’s because he hasn’t.
After eight years, it’s clear that President Obama does not care about black people. He cares about transforming this country. He wants to destroy political opposition with Alinsky-ite flair.
Let’s state what the media won’t: President Obama doesn’t care about black people.
But let’s not be so biased. He doesn’t care about anyone at all.