About Us
Write for Us
Media Info
Advertising Info
New York Times

NY Times harmed America by cheerleading disastrous Obamacare fairy tale

Saturday, November 16, 2013 by: J. D. Heyes
Tags: New York Times, Obamacare, mainstream media

Most Viewed Articles

(NaturalNews) There is a saying that goes, "In for a penny, in for a pound." It's an old British expression meaning, essentially, if you're going to take a risk, you may as well make it a big one.

That's what dozens of mainstream news outlets did when they came to blind support for President Obama and his agenda. That includes, of course, sycophantic adoration for Obamacare.

But the problem this time is that these outlets didn't just take the risk themselves. They put ideology above better judgment, and as such they have hurt all of us, as evidenced by the disaster that Obamacare, predictably, has become.

Enter The New York Times.

'As watchdogs became lapdogs...'

Writing in the rival New York Post, columnist Michael Goodwin notes that now is not a good time for the president. In his fifth year, his administration is in tatters. No one to blame anymore - certainly not George Bush - Obama looks like one incompetent liar.

"Still," Goodwin writes, "before he rides off into that sunset of self-pity and low poll ratings, he ought to invite his remaining friends over for a heart-to-heart. That way he can tell The New York Times that its fanatical support does him no favors."

Rather, he continues, all it does is feed Obama's arrogance and huge ego, as well as "reinforces his belief that he can solve any problem with another speech."

Of course, Obama isn't honest enough with us or himself to admit as much. That said, the so-called "Obama Protection Racket," which is led by political cheerleaders on the Times' Op-Ed pages, "cuts both ways," Goodwin says. Continuing, he notes:

It is a key reason he has defied political gravity for so long, and also why he is now in deep trouble. As watchdogs became lapdogs, the presidential bubble grew impenetrable, isolating him from ordinary Americans and the trickle-down pain of his policies.

From the broadcast networks to MSNBC and most large papers, Obama got the benefit of every doubt. The double standards were a daily disgrace so routine, they mostly provoked a shrug instead of outrage.

Now, however, Obamacare is making the cover-up harder to sell. It is so obviously a disgrace, so demonstrably a failure of big government, that not even old allies can sell that snake oil anymore.

"The ObamaCare debacle is the exception that proves the rule. Wall-to-wall complaints are forcing the media to report that the law's website is a lemon and that its rules are causing millions of people to lose insurance plans they liked," Goodwin wrote.

The American people should have gotten the truth about this awful, terrible law back in the day, long before it ever reached the president's desk and long before Chief Justice John Roberts rewrote parts of the law to make it fit the Constitution.

And the media - mainstream and otherwise - was simply absent.

"The mainstream media is acting only [now] because the story is too big to ignore. Had it been mildly skeptical sooner, it could have exposed the law's destructive rules and prevented the disaster," Goodwin writes.

The Times, however, continues to play its role as chief propagandist for the law and remains its biggest cheerleader. The latest example, Goodwin writes, is "embarrassing enough to make a Gray Lady blush":

After the president's repeated promise that "If you like your health-care plan, you can keep it" was proven false, the editorial page tried to clean up his mess. On Nov. 2, it charged that Republicans were stoking "consumer fears and confusion" by highlighting reports of people losing insurance.

Then came the coverup: "Mr. Obama clearly misspoke" when he made those promises, the editorial said, before dismissing the problems as an "overblown controversy."

The "misspoke" defense set off a firestorm, and even the paper's gentle public editor suggested it was too kind. Naturally, the editors defended their decision not to accuse the president of an outright lie.

Americans will remember the guilty

But that's what the president did. He outright lied. His later apology - which was an apology forced upon him by circumstances, not one that was heartfelt - demonstrates that. If he didn't lie, what's to apologize for?

"The episode graphically illustrates how the Times has harmed the nation by reflexively protecting Obama, facts be damned," Goodwin said. "Instead of just expressing its own liberal views, the editorial page serves as the propaganda arm of the administration, the Jay Carney of print media. Its daily drumbeat of shrill partisanship leaves it indistinguishable from Dem party hacks who spend their waking hours demonizing Republicans."

If, as appears to be the case, tens of millions of Americans are hurt by Obamacare and the president's broken promises, not only will the Democrats who voted for the law suffer, but Goodwin predicts that people will also exact some revenge on the cheerleaders who, to the end, tried to cover up the president's mess.





Receive Our Free Email Newsletter

Get independent news alerts on natural cures, food lab tests, cannabis medicine, science, robotics, drones, privacy and more.

comments powered by Disqus

Natural News Wire (Sponsored Content)

Science News & Studies
Medicine News and Information
Food News & Studies
Health News & Studies
Herbs News & Information
Pollution News & Studies
Cancer News & Studies
Climate News & Studies
Survival News & Information
Gear News & Information
News covering technology, stocks, hackers, and more