Let's All Get Along
The common theme I've been hearing from the libs in the media is that the country is ready to unite and get along. They go soft on Obama because they need to 'give him a chance', and because we're all ready to get along. Translation: the libs want the conservatives to shut up and go along with a president who only represents the values of half of the voting population. The libs are happy with the new president, happy they got their way, and don't want to have to listen to anyone who is not happy or who would dare ask the president elect a tough question.
When did George W ever get a break? Where was this attitude of unity during W's tenure? From the moment he was elected he was given a hard time. "He stole the election!" During 9/11: "Where is the president? Why is he hiding?" (Um, because he IS the president and the extend of the attacks at the time was unknown) After 9/11: "Where is the president? Why isn't he coming to New York?" "What did he know and when did he know it?" "Why did the president take so long to act after being told of the attacks? Why was the president reading books to school children?" Is this the kind of unity the libs are talking about? When did they ever give GW a break?
But now we're being told that nobody wants to hear any kind of talk that is 'divisive', that we all want 'unity', and that we should give Obama a chance. A couple of libs in the media even stated that it is their job to make Obama's presidency a success! Huh? So why wasn't it their job to make W's presidency a success? The role of journalists used to be to dig for the truth and ask tough questions. Apparently now it has become a talking piece for any democrat, going so far as to use democratic phraseology such as 'tax cuts for the rich' (I about fell off the couch when I read that phrase being used in a 'serious' article).
During Bush's presidence we were told that it is patriotic to question your president and that is what being an American is all about. Now apparently being an American means putting blind faith in an inexperienced president with questionable connections. It would be laughable if it weren't so scary at how blind the libs in the media are.
When did George W ever get a break? Where was this attitude of unity during W's tenure? From the moment he was elected he was given a hard time. "He stole the election!" During 9/11: "Where is the president? Why is he hiding?" (Um, because he IS the president and the extend of the attacks at the time was unknown) After 9/11: "Where is the president? Why isn't he coming to New York?" "What did he know and when did he know it?" "Why did the president take so long to act after being told of the attacks? Why was the president reading books to school children?" Is this the kind of unity the libs are talking about? When did they ever give GW a break?
But now we're being told that nobody wants to hear any kind of talk that is 'divisive', that we all want 'unity', and that we should give Obama a chance. A couple of libs in the media even stated that it is their job to make Obama's presidency a success! Huh? So why wasn't it their job to make W's presidency a success? The role of journalists used to be to dig for the truth and ask tough questions. Apparently now it has become a talking piece for any democrat, going so far as to use democratic phraseology such as 'tax cuts for the rich' (I about fell off the couch when I read that phrase being used in a 'serious' article).
During Bush's presidence we were told that it is patriotic to question your president and that is what being an American is all about. Now apparently being an American means putting blind faith in an inexperienced president with questionable connections. It would be laughable if it weren't so scary at how blind the libs in the media are.
posted by PJ at
12:01 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home