IRS, #Benghazi, and Bridgegate: …Guess which one the Media thinks is the only REAL scandal?

The media has been desperate for months now to take the country’s focus off of President Obama’s policy failures, his floundering economy and the sick joke of Obamacare.

So ever since Christie’s ‘Bridgegate’ story broke last week, the Media has behaved with their usual restraint.

Christie - bridgegate media canoli

Now allow me to clarify: I have no problem with the press investigating ANY politician for practically ANYTHING. My only issue is with their attempt to simultaneously cast President Obama’s entire panoply of scandals as mere trumped-up nuisances, even as they portray Bridgegate as a modern-day Khmer Rouge.

There were many video clips I could have selected to illustrate this, but the following one is basically representative of what I’ve seen elsewhere:

As you can see, it is not enough to merely say, “Hey, this story is important on its own“, without the leftist press ALSO insisting that ALL Obama scandals (but especially the IRS and Benghazi) are fabricated nonsense.

Let’s take these in reverse order.

Just this week it was confirmed that (h/t HotAir) the White House knew within minutes that Benghazi was a terrorist attack. And today, a bi-partisan Senate Committee has blamed the failure to prevent the attack itself squarely on the Obama administration (again, via HotAir).

Those two points alone would qualify it as a MAJOR scandal, since the American people were repeatedly told tall tales of some trivial YouTube video which was supposedly to blame, until mounting evidence forced the White House to , …er, “alter” that claim.

Plus, don’t forget these little tidbits:

and you have a huge, messy, ongoing scandal/cover-up.

Yet if anything, the IRS scandal was potentially …even worse.

irs 1

True, no one died. But everything points to Benghazi being a situation that, although foreseeable, does not appear to have been intentional on our part. With the IRS, there is no question that this took tremendous forethought and follow-through. Further, it was waged against an entire cross-section of the American people whose only crime was that they opposed a sitting president’s policies.

In the initial video at the top, Alan Colmes tried to use the discredited “progressives were targeted, too!” line as a way to expunge the entire episode. Sorry, Alan: that simply doesn’t wash.

From National Review Online (July 31, 2013):

“…NPR’s politics blog has published a chart — compiled from a House Ways and Means staff analysis — of the different levels of IRS targeting between conservative and progressive groups. Bottom line? Far more conservative groups faced IRS scrutiny, they faced more questions, and were approved at a much lower rate than progressives. The chart is based on the IRS’s now-discredited “BOLO” (be on the lookout) lists.

Looking at the numbers, the chart answers a question I’ve asked myself ever since the Left claimed that it had been targeted as well: If progressives experienced similar targeting, why didn’t they make any notable contemporaneous complaints? After all, conservatives raised the issue well over a year ago, members of Congress asked the IRS commissioner about it directly, and the New York Times was even moved by the complaints to write its now-clownish March 7, 2012, editorial claiming the IRS was merely “do[ing] its job.”

Perhaps progressives didn’t complain because their targeting experience involved seven groups that were asked an average of just five additional questions (rounded up to be generous) and were approved at a 100 percent rate.

By contrast, 104 ”phony scandal” conservative groups experienced an average of 15 additional questions (14.9 to be exact), only 46 percent were approved, and 56 groups are either waiting for a determination or have withdrawn in frustration.

There is simply no comparison…”

Here’s the chart:


Scarier still is the IRS’ targeting of Conservatives and/or enemies of the White House is as yet ongoing, as seen recently with Sarah Palin’s father, the cancer patient (Bill Elliott) who went on Fox News to tell his Obamacare story, AND the insurance agent (C. Steven Tucker) who dared to help Elliott get his coverage reinstated.

One more thing: if there was really nothing to hide, if “both sides were targeted”, why did the IRS’ Lois Lerner refuse to testify to Issa’s committee and then retire soon after?

Attempting to discount either the IRS’ criminal behavior or the tragedy of Benghazi is pathetic, yet consistent. This White House and their enablers in the Media never stop trotting out washed-up fibs until enough of us make a stink about them.

Then and ONLY then do they ditch the old lie and begin to look for a shiny new one.

Obama scandals

We still don’t know all of what happened with Christie and “Bridgegate”. It may be proven that he knew more than he’s admitted and, obviously, he may be totally vindicated as having known nothing at all.

Or we may never learn much more than we know now.

But attempting to excuse the media’s orgiastic, wall-to-wall “Bridgegate” coverage by dismissing Obama’s far worse scandals as NON-scandals is wrong-headed and incredibly dangerous. ‘Fast-And-Furious’ has been almost literally flushed down the memory hole, and it seems the press has forgiven President Heart-throb for the AP phone records scandal.

If we allow these newest baseless memes to take hold and flourish, unchallenged, we’ll have only ourselves to blame.

5 responses to “IRS, #Benghazi, and Bridgegate: …Guess which one the Media thinks is the only REAL scandal?

  1. Richard M Nixon (Deceased)

    Reblogged this on Dead Citizen's Rights Society.

  2. Should we really have expected anything less, they have been waiting for Christie to make a mistake. Those other things are about the King, I mean Obama and they have to protect him from the truth. I’m still on the fence about Christie and we need to see what he knew.

    To do this knowingly would seem really stupid, these things always make it out eventually. You never know, these people in politics can be very arrogant.

  3. Yea, “nothing to see here people, move along…. scandal what?” Scandal, you must mean that bridge thing. No crimes in the IRS. It’s almost too much to stomach. Just amazing how they rediscovered the word scandal.

  4. livinrightinpgh

    I would have ZERO problem with the MSM big 3 providing 88 minutes of coverage over 2 days with regard to Bridgegate…….AS LONG AS they had provided proportional coverage to the Obama Scandals. Heck, if they had even ASKED the type of probing and follow up questions in the scandals as they did in Bridgegate, it would have been a marked improvement. But, the bottom line (which we ALL know) is that the MSM was there to cover up for Obama, and now they’re there to try and bring down the one person who they believe could challenge “The Hillary”, aka: “What does it matter now” Clinton.

    On a side note……WHO do you think is going to be the next “Obama-esque” figure who will push out Hillary from the 2016 ticket?

  5. I am already sick to death of watching Hillary’s faux smile.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s