There's
a reason I call the mainstream media the “alternative media.”
Most TV news shows, cable news shows, liberal news sites, and many
newspapers have simply demonstrated they are not credible sources of
news. On Wednesday, 9/12, I blogged about the assaults on our
embassies in the Middle East. That's news. That's what Americans
need to hear about. Well, all the rest of that day and yesterday,
the media spends it's time not covering the events in the Middle East
but attacking the timing and tone of Mitt Romney's condemnation of
the attacks and his criticism of President Obama!
Under
the headline, “Mitt
Romney Response To Libya, Egypt Attacks Called 'Irresponsible,'
'Craven,' 'Ham-Handed',” the Huffington
Post
provided some of the following quotes:
The
Romney campaign drew fire on Wednesday morning for issuing a
blistering statement condemning the American embassy in Egypt for
speaking against an incendiary anti-Muslim film, even though the
embassy made the statement before any attacks had taken place. NBC's
Chuck Todd, for instance, called the statement "irresponsible"
and a "bad mistake." ABC's Jake Tapper said that Romney's
attack "does not stand up to simple chronology."
When
Romney appeared in a press conference, reporters had the chance to
ask him substantive questions about the crisis brewing in the Middle
East. Instead, they wasted the entire interview prodding him on his
criticism of Obama. Here
are some of the “tough” questions he was asked:
REPORTER
#1 (male): The statement from the President was very toughly worded
statement last night. Do you regret the tone at all, given what we
know now?
REPORTER
# 2 (female): Governor Romney, do you think, though, coming so soon
after the events, really, had unfolded overnight was appropriate to
be weighing in as this as this crisis is unfolding in real time?
REPORTER
(male) #3: You talk about mixed signals. The world is watching. Isn't
this itself a mixed signal when you criticize the administration at a
time when Americans are being killed? Shouldn't politics stop-
[garbled]
REPORTER
(female) #4: Governor, some people have said that you jumped the gun
a little in putting that statement out last night and that you should
have waited until more details were available. Um, do you regret
having that statement come out so early before we learned about all
of the things that were happening?
REPORTER
#5 (male): If you had known last night that the ambassador died, and,
obviously, I'm gathering you did not know- If you had known that the
ambassador had died, would you have issued such a strongly issued
statement?
REPORTER #6: How specifically, Governor Romney,
would a President Romney have handled the situation differently than
President Obama? [Finally,
some substance]
Are
you freaking kidding me?! On the anniversary of 9/11, two US
embassies were attacked in the Middle East and four US citizens were
killed!! Do these reporters really think the first questions on the
public's mind is whether Romney was a little too hard on Obama for
the administration's early handling of the situation?
I'm
not a news guy but let me offer a little help: “US Embassies
Attacked in Middle East”; “War on Terror Not Over”; “Al Qaeda
Suspected in Organizing Riots that Killed 4 US Officials.” These
are the headlines we need to be reading. What is President Obama
going to do about it? What would President Romney do about it?
These are the questions we need to be asking. Questions like those
above and headlines like, “Romney Shows He's Out of His Depth in
Foreign Policy” are a waste of our time.
No comments:
Post a Comment