A news story or distraction?

In a news story which can only be described as laughable, Charles Babington of the Associated Press tries to divert attention away from the corruption of the Obama administration. Babington portrays the Republicans as being in disarray, telling us they are divided on issues ranging from Immigration to storm relief for tornado victims and the differing views offered by Rand Paul and John Mccain on the tax strategies of Apple Inc.
The strategy here is to take attention away from the President by saying Republicans cant even stop fighting themselves. The sly way he paints Republicans as shills for big corporations who don’t want them to have to pay their fair share while at the same time as misers who don’t care about storm victims by saying they question borrowing money to help them, is meant to discredit the Republicans when they try to investigate this administration. Babington continues this attempt when he says that these divisions are occurring at a time when Republicans want to be united to “exploit the White House’s latest political problems”. What these “problems” are goes unexplained, unlike the supposed problems the Republicans are facing.
The implication that Republicans only care about scoring political points is clear with Babingtons choosing the word exploit to describe their motivation. What is left out is the fact that the White House lied and initiated a cover up of what they knew about Benghazi, possibly conducted illegal actions against perceived political opponents with the IRS and is attempting to circumvent the 1st Amendment by criminalizing investigative reporting from the AP and Fox News. Trying to discover the truth about these issues is not political. The political calculations took place at the White House when the President took or approved these actions, and were furthered by this hack story by Babington.
A real news story would have taken a different path. Babington would have described the multiple scandals embroiling the administration. He then would have explored deep they could go and what possible consequences could occur. He could have asked how the presidents support among his own party in Congress could be affected. Possibly discuss the fact that some like Senator Max Baucus has retired because of the coming “train wreck” of Obamacare. How many more could go down because of future train wrecks? These are important issues that need to be discussed, but pieces like Babington’s don’t contribute to that discussion.


Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

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

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ 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