Advertisement
Columns

Infatuation With Obama; Rage Against Trump

Share
Tweet
email Email
Print
Advertisement

President Trump and his supporters are absolutely right that there’s a glaring contrast between the way media treat this president and the way the press handled his predecessor, Barack Obama.

With Obama, potentially devastating scandals—Benghazi, the IRS, Fast and Furious, the VA—never gained momentum; the press never blamed Obama personally when things went wrong in his administration. For Trump, he’s blamed personally for every embarrassment or disappointment under his watch, and media obsess over dubious charges that remain unproven. But conservatives are wrong to suggest that the treatment of Trump is exceptional. George W. Bush and Bill Clinton also got rough handling by the press; it was the always-forgiving, generally glowing treatment of Obama that was exceptional, extraordinary.

Maybe it was his image as a “hip cool dude,” or his historical status as the first non-white president, but media infatuation with Obama set a dangerous precedent that distorts press-relations with the current administration.

Share
Tweet
email Email
Print

Comments (55)

Leave a comment
  1. Jim Bird  •  Jul 6, 2017 at 6:00 pm

    So what else is new? He tried to overthrow Netanyahu's election by bribing voters, gave the bomb to Iran and hundreds of billions of dollars to terrorist countries so he can now get a return on laundered US taxpayer dollars for his "foundation" by making 20-minute speeches at a million-per. The Clinton's made $2 billion; I'm sure the Obama's can do $20 billion, don't you think? But you hear a derogatory word from the press or the MSM? Schumer, Pelosi and their ilk, Hollywood and the MSM will practically call for Trump's assassination though on a daily basis with no blow-back from Republicans. Should we remain silent? The GOP is mute. Is McCain still referring to Trump as a dictator? What does the GOP do exactly?
    Just got back from 7 weeks in Europe – It's a police state now with roving 2- and 3-person military patrols at airports (every 15 minutes in Nice, France terminals), all major tourist sights and most minor ones, train stations and Metro stations (100% in Rome). The military wear camouflage gear with flak jackets and carry ouzis(?). They travel in camo'ed armor-plated vehicles, many of which barricade streets in front of main sights. The day before we got home, another American cop was assassinated. What caused the "new norms" of cop killings and terrorist attacks in America and Europe. Wow how the world has changed when we last were in Europe six years ago. What's changed? Oh, I know, it's Trump! Just ask Rosie O. or Cher or McCain.

  2. Gary  •  Jul 7, 2017 at 3:45 pm

    Disagree with the double standard concept.
    Simple equation…
    Obama- professional leader, treated the confrontational & oppositional media with respect.
    Trump- not-so-professional leader, treats the confrontational & oppositional media with disdain & disregard.
    One reaps what they sow.

    • Leslie  •  Jul 9, 2017 at 3:15 pm

      The media was not confrontational and oppositional to Obama. He had no need to be heavy handed with them. They were in his back pocket from the beginning. Big difference here that the liberals just won't accept.

    • Pat Allen  •  Jul 9, 2017 at 6:43 pm

      Only a true cool-aid drinking democrat and Obama support could not see the double standard between Trump and Obama and recognize the danger that a compliant media has for our country. Obama, with media complicity, is the closest I've ever felt that our country could be taken over by one party.

    • James  •  Jul 15, 2017 at 12:36 pm

      And what about George Bush? He was treated very poorly by the media in a way that Obama was not. Did Bush fit your description of "not-so-professional leader, treats the confrontational & oppositional media with disdain & disregard?" I will answer for you because you are clearly a hyper-partisan. No, Bush did not fit your description in any way. And you are wrong about Obama, he did treat certain media outlets with contempt, remember his statements and treatment of Fox News? But yeah, I know, Fox deserved it, right? You disagree with the double standard concept because you can't think objectively. And did you even read the article? The article specifically mentioned how scandals were reported. Your comment is all about the demeanor of the two presidents. I think you missed the point of the article and created your own points that you responded to. That is called a strawman argument.

    • tim  •  Jul 15, 2017 at 2:52 pm

      Thank you, Gary. Good point.

  3. Dexter L. Wilson  •  Jul 7, 2017 at 3:45 pm

    Obama could do no wrong with the media. Let's see who was his mentor, Saul Alinsky who was amoral atheistic, socialistic and all he wanted was power! Since the media is in love with both Hillary and Barak both having Saul as their mentor,WHAT DOES THAT TELL YOU ABOUT THE MEDIA. REMEMBER BEING AMORAL MEANS YOU CAN LIE AND I CAN'T GET PASSED THE IDEA THAT THE MEDIA HAS NO PROBLEM LYING TO US.

    • Christina Landree  •  Jul 8, 2017 at 3:24 am

      Oh so you're saying it's okay for the president to lie and make up a story about Mika brzezinski's bleeding face from a facelift she didn't have? So it's okay for Trump to lie and say he had a bigger inauguration crowd then Obama? And it's okay for the president to say that three million illegal voters voted for Hillary Clinton even though we don't know who voted for who and how do you know that some of these illegal voters didn't vote for Trump? And last but not least we have a president that tried to stop an investigation into Russia hacking into our election. Ye without sin cast the first stone please!

      • Pat Allen  •  Jul 9, 2017 at 6:45 pm

        Presidents lie, the difference is that the media was complicit in Obama's lies. I don't have a problem calling Trump out for lies, but creating fictions when they don't exist and then calling him out is un-excusable. The best thing about the media flap in this election and this presidency is that the American people can finally see the media for what it is… an arm of the Democrat party. Nothing more, nothing less. Treat them appropriately.

      • James  •  Jul 15, 2017 at 12:44 pm

        Dexter said nothing like that and you just made up a whole narrative for him based on your own hatred of Trump.

        None of what you mentioned is okay. But two wrongs don't make a right. The media is supposed to be composed of professionals who report without bias (as much as possible) without regard to their personal like or dislike of the people they are reporting on. And there is no good evidence that Trump tried to stop the Russia investigation. Every body agrees that the investigation would continue without Comey as FBI director.

        And why are you quoting the Bible at the end? What does that have to do with anything? Are you saying that if a person is not perfect they can't criticize the actions of others? Hint, you are not Jesus and we are not talking about religion here. Under your standard every person is beyond criticism. Your theory of Trump deserves to be treated badly by the press because he is a "liar" is blaming the victim. How about this – "Love your enemy." Get back to us with your Bible citations when you observe that one.

      • tim  •  Jul 15, 2017 at 2:53 pm

        Thank you Christina. Good points.

  4. Aaron  •  Jul 7, 2017 at 4:40 pm

    I would agree that the media coverage of Trump and Obama is vastly different. Obama was adored by most of the large (and left leaning) conglomerates. Trump gets far less favorable coverage. While I think the media treatment of Trump is the harshest I've seen of a sitting president in my lifetime, I would contend that the treatment of Obama was the most fawning. My point of disagreement is with the treatment Bill Clinton received. While the media was nowhere near as enamored with Clinton as they were with Obama. If you compare the media coverage of Bush with that of Clinton. Clinton received far more positive treatment. While the difference between Bush and Clinton was not nearly as glaring as Trump and Obama. It was definitely present.

    This illustrates the disturbing trend of increasing polarization along party lines. The bulk of the large media organizations appear to be in the Democrat camp or at least sympathetic to the progressive/liberal ideology. There has been a slow but steady pressure exerted by media, entertainment and (to some extant) educational institutions, to undermine conservative principles and redefine social norms. Whether you consider this problematic or laudable, it has occurred.

    While there are some serious philosophical differences between conservatives and liberals, the rampant tribalism is taking the nation down a dark and tenuous path. The wondrous success of the American experiment has been built upon the foundation of a citizenry willing to treat others as they would be treated. The primary reason our founding fathers were so interested in the Judeo/Christian ethic as the moral foundation of our government, was not to use institutionalized religion to coerce belief or mandate theology. It was understood that freedom and prosperity were inexorably linked to a citizenry educated in these principals. Love of ones neighbor is the best cure for violence and crime. Love of ones enemy is the quickest way to avoid escalating conflict. Forgiveness, gratitude and self-control go hand-in-hand with success and happiness.

    Both parties pay these principles lip service or leverage them for political gain. There is very little love being presented in the media these days. The tribes seem more interested in conquering than cooperating.

    • Ty  •  Jul 10, 2017 at 1:43 pm

      I'm one of the people who has become more radicalized and tribal over the years. I was always a social liberal, but flirted with conservative ideas on economics, and even bought into the neocon wing of conservatism (thanks David Frum / Christopher Hitchens) that had its apotheosis in voting for McCain in 2008 against Obama.

      But that changed. I was worried Obama was going to instantly pull troops out of Iraq, and he did not, his foreign policy was not the kind of "abandon your posts" maneuver that was presented as certain on Talk Radio

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qLpPAz0tz98

      And though I do think his eventually draw down of troops turned out to be a disaster with the rise of Isis, it was a disaster in part because of the ROT of the players in the middle east. I bought into the notion that maybe what was missing there was freedom and a lack of democracy, but there I learned that more "freedom" and having the steel cleated boot of a dictator off your neck could lead to worse results if the people given that freedom took their opportunities to engage in centuries long blood feuds.

      Conservatives on talk radio, especially the true ideologues place this entire failure on Obama and his weakness and fecklessness, I found that interesting because these same conservatives domestically spend so much time talking about personal agency. Do the Iraqis themselves bear no responsibility for the safety and protection and defense of their own nation? Of rejecting religious radicalism? All of these "CHOICES" of men and peoples are a function of what Obama does or does not do? The glaring inconsistency of standards was enough to crack the facade of my respect for the honesty of large chunks of conservatives. I already had it broken for large chunks of people on the left when they kept arguing that the main reason Bush decided to go into Iraq was because he wanted to steal their oil, which I always found hopelessly uncharitable an interpretation.

      Then I listened to conservatives demonize Obama left and right for years on end, people like Prager called him the worst president in American history. The same hysteria people like him claimed was a feature of the left I saw him engage in in spades. I knew from my own psyche that the things he was attributing to people who leaned left were not universally true, but demagogues like him and some of the commenters here took the most cartoonish aspects of left wing behavior and painted the entire group with tar.

      They call every redistribution scheme under the sun socialism, reading the definition shows clearly they are misusing the word. But they don't care, they just lie, or pretend not to know to prop up narratives that are convenient to them.

      And I have come to hate them for it. Viscerally despise them. The Cruz supporters tend to be the worst types because he attracts the maggots and flies of conservative ideologue thought like carrion.

      The internet allows people to better segment themselves, and for people like me that consume plenty of media that does not align with my own views (within reason, I can't tolerate listening to Mark Levin or Hannity for too long, too much BS and hyperbole for me to stomach), I have a front row seat into the exaggerations and misinformation spread about people like me and my views, or what the priorities of many conservatives are.

      I know the internal thoughts of my political opponents more than I ever did, and this is not conducive for coming together. I think it may be too much information. I know that we do not want the same things. I know that because I listen to them and take them at their word. Take the recent study of minimum wage for Seattle.

      Preliminary results are that once it hit 13 dollars an hour in the city, hours worked began to fall for some people and some people were let go (some of this expected). The key result though was that at the end of the month, some segments were taking home less money overall with the higher minimum wages. Now I was in favor of higher minimum wages, but if this studies results hold, I would gladly seek to roll them back. Because for me the North Star of the policy goal was improving the financial prospects for people at the bottom, not make them worse off. If the policy does not work, we should scuttle it.

      This was a result that was plastered all over conservative media, and why not? The results reinforced their presumptions. But what about conservative "experiments" that failed just like this liberal one might have done? Remember Kansas?

      Brownback, with previous consultation from Michaels friend Stephen Moore, went for one of those cut taxes on business plans for the state. The claims were that it would UNLEASH The BEAST of growth such that even though tax rates would fall, the increased economic activity and boom for the state would make up the difference.

      It failed. Kansas has had revenue and budget shortfalls for years now, and they just barely had CONSERVATIVES in the legislature revolt and overturn a Veto from Brownback to raise taxes and revenue back up to stabilizing levels.

      Now I think it's a GREAT thing that both of these approaches were tried. How do we know whether some policy idea will work unless we try it out? But Conservatives have said NOTHING about the Brownback failures in Kansas.

      Success has a thousand fathers, but failure is an orphan. But in Conservative media, failure of your opponent is NOT an orphan, it's to be championed, and your own failures? Still orphans. What failures? And if you bring it up, no doubt they will shift to a Liberal State like Illinois and their budget issues.

      This lack of introspection, and just basic dishonesty has influenced my disdain for such people, and talk radio gives me a front row seat to them all. I do not feel like I work with such people, I think they need to be beaten and cast aside.

      • Rizzo  •  Jul 10, 2017 at 8:32 pm

        Ty…
        Hmmm… So you think talk-radio is biased? Turn on your TV, look in the mirror.
        At least talk radio, the ones in which you referenced, are TOTALLY HONEST about their point of view. They don't hide and try to mislead the public into thinking that they are unbiased, objective news sources.
        What a fraud perspective you have just presented.
        In your own commentary, you are far more guilty of anything or anyone that you have presented. Perhaps, you should take a HEAVY DOSE of your own prescription… A WHOLE LOT OF INTROSPECTION.

      • Bill  •  Jul 11, 2017 at 2:06 pm

        "Beaten and cast aside"? Rational thinking from the left.

      • Ty  •  Jul 11, 2017 at 7:31 pm

        Yes. If compromise is impossible due to ideologues, you have to win more seats and go it alone. It took the failure of the Iraq war to get enough democrats in congress to actually be able to pass some kind of healthcare reform, to try to increase coverage. Republicans were missing in action on that policy front, it was far below higher priorities like tax reform and regulations, the alpha and omega of elite conservative thought. What else matters? Damned if I know.

        Just don't try to talk to them about any virtues of changing the status quo of healthcare. Government is involved? Must be bad. Just rely on the free market, that will solve all the cost issues. It does with normal consumer goods, ergo, it will with healthcare as well. It does so with elective plastic surgery, so it will with healthcare too.

        So much ideology, so many conservatives enslaved by such easy and comforting assumptions. It works in cases X, Y, and Z, so it will work in case W? Because why? You believe it?

        Tell me, conservatives, what is the market value of a human life? Might there be a different valuation in the minds of men on their own lives and the lives of their families compared to a consumer good like a computer or car, or optional plastic surgery? Might there be some difference? I am asking, because precious few conservatives ever seen to entertain the POSSIBILITY that their end all jesus miracle known as the PURE market MIGHT not be the ideal solution in ALL cases, like say, healthcare.

        Too much, don't tell that to Ted Cruz or the freedom caucus. Market solves all in all spheres. These are the shackles of ideology, I try to strike at the chains to free conservatives, but they are bound firm. Easy answers, or easy dismissals of an obligation to try to solve issues in our society by shifting the burdens and blames to individuals. Always that.

        If that is all I can expect from conservatives, then yes, I need to see them beaten and cast aside politically. If they cannot be better, they need to be removed.

      • Rizzo  •  Jul 12, 2017 at 3:45 pm

        First of all, what's the compromise between freedom and slavery, between liberty and tyranny? Damned if I know. So, if standing on the side of freedom and liberty, makes me an "ideologue", then so be it… I am an ideologue! And don't expect people of principle to compromise those most basic of American VALUES.

        The market value of human life? Perhaps you should ask that of your fellow man that values computers, cars, cell-phones, cigarettes, etc., but can't or more accurately WON'T prioritize their life in such a way as to afford insurance, or healthcare? To put it simply, how and why should/could I care more about my fellow man than he does for himself?

        Now, let's address your ignorant ideas about the "PURE FREE MARKET".
        PLEASE, tell me when in your life, have you EVER experienced the "PURE FREE MARKET"? Has anyone living, EVER experienced the "PURE FREE MARKET"?
        So Ty, since the answer is NO, nobody has ever experienced the "PURE FREE MARKET", and you are a cutting edge, progressive guy… let's try the "PURE FREE MARKET". Remove the "shackles of your ideology" and try something new.

        But, you, like ALL PURE LEFTISTS, will oppose… Because, like all pure leftists, you hate freedom. At the root of all arguments against the free-market, is the arguments against freedom itself.

        Class dismissed Ty… Buh-bye

      • Ty  •  Jul 12, 2017 at 4:41 pm

        I DREAM of a pure free market being tried. Not in the entire nation of course, I want it A true believing conservative state to cut the reigns of government and experiment with something as close to Galts Gultch as possible. I want the ideologues to measure the policies and restrictions they deem worthy and unworthy being enacted or removed to their specifications. And when it fails and falls into the ditch, I want to hold it up as an example of their abject failure. And if it succeeds, great, THEN, and only then we will have data that a PURE market works across society. I would love to see myself proved wrong, then you can gloat and deserve it.

        I think things approaching a pure market work best under certain conditions. And in those areas I want a more pure market, I just do not assume that standard should be spread to literally every corner of society.

        So I welcome the challenge of conservative ideologues getting their own state to experiment with. Which state do you want? Mississippi? Kentucky? Oklahoma? Utah?

      • Rizzo  •  Jul 12, 2017 at 7:05 pm

        I don't have to dream of your socialist, Utopia.
        IT HAS A RECORD OF FAILURE SO COMPLETE, that ONLY an ideologue, such as yourself would continue to promote it.

        So, if you were genuine, in your dreams for a "Pure Free Market", why is your default position ALWAYS MORE GOVERNMENT, AND LESS FREDOM?
        Why are your solutions ALWAYS MORE CENTRALIZED, TOP-DOWN CONTROL?

        And, your idea about success… We have already seen the results. The US, and the US way of life aka THE FREE MARKET, has created more wealth for more people, in the history of the world. And it did in less than 250 years. While the old, pathetic Euro-trash nations wallowed in mediocrity and far worse, America created a system of wealth unmatched in recorded, human history…. It takes a REAL IDEOLOGUE, AND TRUE-BELIEVER TO NEGLECT THOSE FACTS!

    • Ty  •  Jul 12, 2017 at 7:30 pm

      If you look around this nation and consider yourself a slave Rizzo, you are a moron. There is nothing else to say, and I should have gotten on your weak answer over the value of a human life.

      You think EVERYONE who can't afford health insurance premiums is wasting money on expensive iphones and tvs and cars? This is the deep sickness of a strand of conservatism. You gravitate ALL your attention to the cheats and the parasites of society, the people who are able bodied and can easily take care of themselves and merely choose not to in the hopes that they will get someone else to pay for something. And the 60 year old who has some preexisting condition? Who loses a job and with no changes in this new Trump plan has to pay THOUSANDS of dollars a month to maintain coverage? He is a loser and a waste of human flesh because he can't afford that? Was he a cheat? Was he lazy? You piss stain of a human being dare sit in judgment of millions of people who are better men than you will EVER be, who fall down and face burdens harder than you have and perhaps ever will, and you look at their inability to afford care and turn your back on them. Not your problem, not your dime. LET-THEM-DIE. If they can't be treated at an emergency room, let em die.

      To all other reading this who are not one of these fool ideologues, this is why I hate them, this is why I want nothing to do with these rotten people. There actually IS a way to deal with the free rider problem. It's called universal healthcare. IF we paid for healthcare through taxes, then literally everyone who worked would pay into the system, the people who worked and chose not to get insurance in the current system and went to an emergency room to get care would NOT be able to free ride. And yes, we'd also cover the indigent, and those who earn less money than it costs to cover them, we would share the cost burden for the nation. Don't like that? Tough, this is what I intent to fight all of you on until the end of time, until my last days. You are the kinds of people who see a road you do not travel along and ask why your tax dollars go to pay for that? Because you live in a god damn civilization, not some randian hellscape. And this does not make you a damn slave, GOD you people are a fragile bunch of little spazzes. You're a slave if you have some of your taxes pay for a universal healthcare system? Then you are a SLAVE now for having your taxes pay for a universal k-12 education entitlement, and you'd STILL be a SLAVE if you had your taxes pay for universal school voucher credits.

      Is that clear you MORON? Do you even think through the most BASIC logical implications of what you are saying? And what else it applies to? Why am I bothering. You are a Cruz Type, total lost cause.

      I can't compromise with this attitude people, they have the ideological flexibility of diamond, and they need to be broken and cast aside, not compromised with.

      • Rizzo  •  Jul 12, 2017 at 7:45 pm

        Wow…. Ty shows his TRUE LEFTIST HATE.
        PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE show me an example of a 60-year old with a pre-existing condition dying in the streets. PLEASE!!!

        Because, I'll show you your government-run UTOPIAN Healthcare Dream… It's called Great Britain, and they are choosing death for a couples' child. They won't even allow them the FREEDOM to come to America and try a life-saving treatment.
        And who EXACTLY is the HEARTLESS IDEOLOGUE…. IT'S YOU! You hate-filled leftist, MORON.

      • Rizzo  •  Jul 12, 2017 at 8:46 pm

        Tell Charlie Gard and his parents how great and compassionate the British Universal Healthcare System is.
        Hopefully, if you have a child facing a life-threatening disease, you won't be forced to beg your case before a court of law.
        So great your UTOPIA is.

      • Ty  •  Jul 12, 2017 at 11:48 pm

        Oh cut the crap about Charlie Gard. If it were up to me I'd let them take the kid for treatment, there is no reason we cannot design a Universal Health Care system that allows more autonomy for families (especially when they pony up the cash themselves or have specialty hospitals donate their services) to go to extreme lengths to extend life.

        But the Charlie Gard case is a TRASH argument against universal healthcare. UTTER Trash.

      • Rizzo  •  Jul 13, 2017 at 12:18 am

        But that's just the point…. It's NOT UP TO YOU!
        Universal Healthcare by design and necessity is a GOVERNMENT-RUN, UNCARING, BUREACRACY.

        WAKE UP YOU DAMN DRONE!

    • Rizzo  •  Jul 12, 2017 at 8:00 pm

      Federal officials set up the Medicare Fraud Strike Force in 2007, which visited at random nearly 1,600 businesses in Miami, ground zero for Medicare fraud, that had billed Medicare for durable medical equipment.  Officials found that nearly a third of the businesses, 481, didn’t even exist, yet they had billed Medicare for $237 million over the previous year, according to National Public Radio.

      In 2010 the Government Accountability Office (GAO) released a report claiming to have identified $48 billion in what it termed as “improper payments.”  That’s nearly 10 percent of the $500 billion in outlays for that year.

      The money private sector health insurers lose in fraud, are estimated to lose approximately 1 to 1.5 percent in fraud.  Medicare and Medicaid is closer to 10 to 15 percent. 

      But don't worry Ty, just keep dumping money into a broken system until it completely bankrupts our society.
      PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE tell me, who are you going to help when your blind devotion to government solution BANKRUPTS THE US?

      Please familiarize yourself with the US Debt and do a little research on what happens to countries when financial strains collapse their society…. It ain't pretty.

      • Ty  •  Jul 13, 2017 at 12:05 am

        If Fraud is that prevalent with UHC systems and all those European nations STILL pay half what we pay per capita, then that shows our system must be orders of magnitude worse when it comes to a cost structure. Have you ever seen a medical bill from an insurance company? How much money is paid for drugs and services LEGALLY!!! Without fraud? You don't give a damn about costs or fraud you just want anything you think that might stick to delegitimize the true enemy. Government involvement in healthcare. And so you divert attention away from bigger issues and costs, you do anything you can to preserve the dogma.

        government bad
        free market good

        I'd live to see a free market libertarian armed services, with an army structured on the foundation of self interest and profit. Duty? Honor? Serving a higher purpose and cause? The good of your comrades and the nation? Eff all that, what's in it for ME? What was that Sergeant? You want me to rush into the line of fire and provide cover fire? And this is in my interest HOW?

        Rizzo: COMMUNIST !!!!!!!! The free market is ALWAYS the ideal model in ALL spheres !!!!!!!!!!

        Ty: …. This is my own fault. I should have learned the wisdom from Marcy from Married with children so many years ago. You give a gun to a chimp, and the chimp shoots someone, you don't blame the chimp.

        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TnCIQltB2IA

        When I argue against a wall of nonsense, I become like Michael talking to a conspiracy theorist nut. There is nothing productive in the activity. And yet, I still feel impelled to try to clear the madness from their broken minds. Like trying to sweep the sand from the desert, I know it's an impossible task, the damage is too great, but it's like seeing trash in the street. It bothers me seeing it there and I want to clear the clutter out.

        Incidentally, if Debt is the metric of societal collapse, someone explain Japan. They have far more debt than we do, and are still humming along. Talking Greece? They were problematic, but Greece produces what exactly? I think that is the problem. The US produces quite a lot, is still a large world manufacturer, I think our tolerance for debt is much higher than conservatives suspect. And we'll see how much you complain about debt going forward. The projected budget for next year is not slated to shrink the debt, gotta pay for those tax cuts to wealthy people. But I'm sure you will still come on these boards and complain about that too when Republicans are the cause.

      • Rizzo  •  Jul 13, 2017 at 9:25 am

        Correction Ty…

        Illegitimate Government = Bad

        Why would there ever be a "libertarian armed service", you moron?
        You expose your utter and pure ignorance of legitimate government and the US Constitution.

        Ty: John Galt !!!!! Government solutions are always the BEST! Throughout history, government has a proven history of ONLY doing good for all !!!!!!

        Rizzo: I should have learned from the wisdom of Fred G Sanford when he was talking to LaMont, and said "You big dummy".

        Seriously, the "logic" of your dogma are non-existent. You lack historical context, fundamental understanding of the US Constitution, and just general knowledge of the ineptitude of centralized government.

        Here Ty…. it would seem that you are from the great state of California, correct?
        You also expressed a half-assed willingness to apply states' rights when it applies to "free markets", right?
        Why don't you California leftists do your own, state-run UNIVERSAL HEALTHCARE SYSTEM?
        What's stopping you? Do it! PLEASE DO IT!
        In a few years, we can discuss the HUGE SUCCESS! LOL!!!

  5. Steve B.  •  Jul 7, 2017 at 7:37 pm

    the K.I.S. about the media and Obama is BHO was a salve to the lefty media's white guilt.

  6. Nani Tavares  •  Jul 8, 2017 at 7:39 pm

    As anyone will tell you I am NOT a Trump person. But I AM a stickler for fairness. Every time I hear about the lies, bad manners and collusion of this president, I want to scream. I can list a whole bunch of promises Obama made, the bad manners shown to our allies, not to mention his indifference to a whole part of the population that was not Black or shared his ideology. But really, would the Left ever get it? The fact is the reason that Trump was elected and Congress given to the Republican party comes down to this: the MAJORITY got tired of political correctness, victimization, and entitlement demands. For 8 years, Americans were subject to the unfairness that only the poor and unfortunate counted and that somehow the working class has to be responsible for them. The majority have now risen up and said no more. Your guilt card doesn't work anymore. You don't get to take our money and spend it on your agenda. There is a price for elections…and now it's YOUR turn to pay. Deal with it.

    • Nani Tavares  •  Jul 8, 2017 at 7:49 pm

      One other thing: it's only fair for me to admit that I am awfully glad that Trump is our president. I am a STRONG supporter of the 2nd amendment (so don't even go there) and the realization that Hillary could have put gun hating judges on the Supreme Court and interpret the 2nd amendment as rights for government run militia scares the cr@p out of me! I look at what is happening with North Korea and Isis and I could imagine 4 more years of Obama's leading from behind Hillary and again, I am SO glad to have an in your face, unpredictable Trump as our commander in chief! I am not a Trump apologist; never was, never will be. I am a pragmatist and is my firm belief that we needed someone like Trump at this time in this world.

  7. Rizzo  •  Jul 9, 2017 at 10:13 am

    Nani… If this is the same Nani… I am thrilled to see your transformation!
    It's a pleasure to be on the same side, fighting for the same goals.

    • Nani Tavares  •  Jul 9, 2017 at 6:59 pm

      Yes Rizzo, it is the same Nani and I see the "smile" in your posts when I argue with Liberals. I've had NO transformation. I told you before I am a pragmatist and it is pragmatic to have an in your face, take no cr@p commander in chief. It's about time; I am so sick of taking the Leftist guilt trip. I love the fact that Trump has allowed the generals to fight our battles and the experts to run things. I think it will be a long time before the American people will see the genocide of the pre-born babies or the ridiculous transgender/same sex marriage, but I didn't realize that the SCOTUS could change the second amendment; that is a total no-no, sorry, non-negotiable as I am a stickler for fairness and guns are equalizers and fair to those who are not strong or big. To safeguard this all important right, it is pragmatic to be grateful for Trump; it is chilling to think of a Obama 2 (aka Hillary) being able to nominate the judges. And I am so tired of all this victimization and ID politics as thou the rest of us don't have a right to disagree and think differently. I said that I hate bullies and it scares me to death to have a crazy man having his hands on the nuke codes, but there are all types of bullies: political correct bullies and other kind of insanity: Kim Jong-in is beyond nutty. Sometimes the only practical thing to do is have your own bully. Trump is mine.

      • Nani Tavares  •  Jul 9, 2017 at 7:28 pm

        Speaking of Obama 2, can you imagine Hillary dealing with Kim Jon-un? Or trying to reset Russia? Or…how scary is that?

  8. Rizzo  •  Jul 9, 2017 at 8:39 pm

    Nani..
    Regarding policy, Trump is still a bit of a wildcard for me. I aligned most closely with Ted Cruz.
    Having said that, Trump has taken some very solidly conservative actions… which I Love!
    Additionally, nobody would fight back, like Trump… Which Mostly, I love too!!!

    • James  •  Jul 15, 2017 at 12:51 pm

      You are wasting your time replying to Ty. He is clearly full of hate and doesn't debate honestly. I still remember him making a big deal about white nationalists in a post, actually I think more than one. When I pointed out that there are virtually no white nationalists in this county (we take more refugees every year than there are white nationalists), he admitted that it was a fringe position. But then he keeps bringing it up as somehow representative of conservatives. He is dishonest, full of hate, and closed-minded. There is not point in debating him.

  9. Warren Johnson  •  Jul 9, 2017 at 9:24 pm

    Mr Medved,

    I'm disappointed in your column, because I don't think it is fair. The scandals you cite are obviously far from Obama's immediate supervision. Bad things happen all the time, and a fair minded person would weigh to what extent they are the fortunes of war, or the inadvertent consequence of well-meaning policies, or the result of malice. My own reading is that none of the scandales you mention were more than the bad luck or petty behavior by government functionaries.

    Trump, on the other hand, is not the victim of the press, but a victim of his own faults. The press is just reporting his bad behavior, and minimizes much of it, because their is so much.

    Trump's sin is to divide the world in two: those who think he is great, and those who are enemies. This is not an invention of the press, but an obvious conclusion from a thousand tweets and speeches.

    And that crosses the line. We liberals might think that Republicans, and conservatives, and Trump, and you, are misguided, but we still wish you well, want you to live long and prosper, and we love our country very much. Why can't you?

    About Obama, I cannot remember a instance where he showed malice. Disagreement yes, but no malice.

    About Trump, I remember hundreds of cases of malice: insulting or denigrating: Republicans, Democrats, Europeans, Mexicans, disabled people, women, Muslims, climate science, etc. etc. Trump's middle name is malice. I wonder if he tortures cats for fun.

    So how about it, Medved, are you ready to argue that Trump is an exemplar of Christian virtues? Phooey I say. He is the an anti-Christian.

    • Rizzo  •  Jul 9, 2017 at 9:54 pm

      Your assessment of Obama is so far off the mark, I don't even know where to start.
      Trump calls it as he sees it. He doesn't mince words. It's understandable how a snowflake, like yourself, would assume malice,
      Those of us, who supported him, see Trump as an unapologetic American Patriot.
      After 8 years of the Anti-American Obama, Trump is a breath of fresh air!

      • Nani Tavares  •  Jul 10, 2017 at 6:10 pm

        Rizzo! You've got a wannabe! There's a Rizzo1983…he thinks by taking part of your name, he'll come across as partly smart. Oh fun! I don't think I've seen the Liberals this desperate!

    • Nani Tavares  •  Jul 10, 2017 at 12:11 am

      Warren Johnson, it must be difficult to realize that your "fairness" con isn't working any more. I mean, you've come to a conservative web site and is DEMANDING that in the name of fairness, Michael try to make his case to YOU as tho YOUR opinion matters. Sorry but millions of Americans made their choice and for the next 4 to 8 years, it will be YOUR turn to take it. Yep, the only replies you will be receiving are "And your point is? " and " Do we look like we care?"

      • rizzo1983  •  Jul 10, 2017 at 3:30 pm

        And that's why conservatives are pathetic. 45 is the most feckless President ever. President Obama had no issues or scandals Benghazi fast and furious nothing more than right wing whack conservative contrivance. So you cons baste in your ignorance whilst I count the number of significant legislation signed by Donald Con John…the count is at zero!

    • James  •  Jul 15, 2017 at 1:15 pm

      You are seeing Obama through rose colored glasses. Obama was full of malice; he was just smart enough to try to hide it. Trump hasn't figured that out yet, and I doubt he will.

      Obama constantly made malicious comments about republicans. Remember how for nearly his entire two terms, he would frequently, and nearly always unfairly, blame the previous administration for problems in the country? Remember the one about how republicans crashed the bus? I think he also said republicans deserve to go to the back of the bus. Remember when he went to the prayer meeting and said that Christians needed to get off their high-horse and wrongly attributed bad acts to Christians in a way he would never do to Muslims?

      His malice was also clearly revealed in his strawman arguments. He always made a ridiculous straw-man argument to represent the republican position and in a way that made republicans seem like bad people. Remember him implying that republicans want to see some minority group, I can't remember which one, beat up in the streets?

      But his malice was even more clearly shown in his policy actions with regard to groups with which he disagreed. Remember his refusal exempt religious organizations from his health care mandates even when those mandates conflicted with their religious beliefs? Remember his administration suing a group of nuns, the Sisters of the Poor, to force them to provide contraception coverage in their health insurance policies? I think maliciousness towards certain religious people is the best explanation for why Obama wouldn't just compromise on that issue was well as many other issues.

      And on Trump being a Christian, do you listen to the Medved show? Medved did not vote for Trump. You won't hear Medved defending Trump's bad behavior in any way whatsoever. And Trump clearly admitted during the campaign that he was not a Christian when he said he had never asked God for forgiveness. That is a basic requirement of being a Christian. Trump isn't a Christian or an anti-Christian, he is a childish, narcissist. It doesn't get any deeper than that.

  10. Bill Baxter  •  Jul 10, 2017 at 5:45 pm

    Obama is a much more likable person than Trump.
    Obama is unfailingly polite while Trump is very rude.
    Obama's personal conduct is good Trump's is often bad.

    • Nani Tavares  •  Jul 10, 2017 at 6:40 pm

      Bill, and we want someone nice in this world of terrorism, leftist bullying, and threats to our way of life and our economy?

      • Ty  •  Jul 11, 2017 at 7:33 pm

        Conservatives are such victims

      • Rizzo  •  Jul 11, 2017 at 8:14 pm

        Being a Conservative is a NO-VICTIM ZONE.
        But don't expect us to ignore the reality that you leftists are violent bullies, that lack the ability to effectively influence people without silencing free-speech through your use of violence, legislation, political-correctness speech shaming, or an all-of-the-above approach.
        Your beliefs can't stand on facts, logic, rational thought, etc., so you have to silence your opponents, who do imploy those tactics.
        You leftist have become a pathetic, ever-shrinking tribe of violence and pure nonsense.

      • Bill Baxter  •  Jul 13, 2017 at 4:30 am

        The topic is why the media likes Obama and dislikes Trump. I think my reasons are a good answer.

        Of course Obama wasn't perfect but he was much better than Trump (or Hillary Clinton).

      • Rizzo  •  Jul 19, 2017 at 5:52 pm

        Bill
        We voted for a President, not a high school popularity contest.

    • James  •  Jul 15, 2017 at 1:19 pm

      None of that justifies a press, that is supposedly composed of professionals, having a double standard with regards to investigations of alleged scandals. Press investigations of public figures should not depend on how nice and courteous the politician behaves. And your comment conveniently ignores that fact that this very short article mentioned that Obama was treated differently than Trump, Bush and Clinton. Were Bush and Clinton – less likable, very rude, and with bad personal conduct?

  11. Nani Tavares  •  Jul 12, 2017 at 3:09 pm

    Perhaps Liberals are right: we ARE a racist country. How else to explain the re-election of a man who downgraded this nation's credit rating and who disrespected Christians, cops, the military, and the constitution? I can even understand why Liberals believe that there has to be some kind of crooked dealings that handed the White House to Trump. I too questioned and still question the validity of Obama's re-election. It was cool to have the first Black president; Obama could have had the entire U.S. eating out of his hands if he had extended any kind of respect to the other side. But after the first 4 years, we KNEW what we had in the White House and still he was re-elected?

    Obama made another government controlled entitlement a "right" and drove a wedge of anger and hate between the races; yet the media claim that the only thing that threatened this country is possible, maybe, perhaps Russian interference in our elections…an interference that did NOT begin when Trump was elected.

    How amusingly desperate.

    • Ty  •  Jul 12, 2017 at 4:50 pm

      Nani, your incredulity is your own fault. Republicans have lost the popular vote for the last 3 presidential elections, and won the last election in spire of their shortcoming. A Great many people in this nation want nothing to do with conservative governance. I understand that not everyone thinks like a liberal like myself, I even understand that plenty of liberals that are further left than I am are not aligned on many issues, but then I am clearly not as oblivious as you are about the widely divergent ranges of views.

      Most people prefer Obama over Trump, that's just a fact, and the sad part is that they even preferred Hillary over Trump, as compromised as she was. None of this gives you any pause or shakes the disbelief that other people don't think the same as you.

      Look at the vote totals Nani, you are not representative of the entire nation, at best you are aligned with half the country, no more. Wake up and smell reality.

      • Nani Tavares  •  Jul 12, 2017 at 6:28 pm

        Ty, the reality is Liberals LOST. They didn't win. They continue to lose. What part of that reality do you not understand?

        The thing that really bothers Liberals is that with that lost comes the erosion of their cards: guilt, race, and gender. You've spent years DEFINING what those mean and now, people are just not buying.

        Again, how amusing. Sad, but amusing.

  12. Rizzo  •  Jul 12, 2017 at 7:12 pm

    Liberals consistently lose on local, state and National levels…. They will never entirely go away, I mean my GOD, if Hilary hadn't rigged her own nomination process, The Democrats would have run a known, unapologetic SOCIALIST as their candidate. Ty, you are so far out of the mainstream, it's pathetic.
    So as long as one candidate promises to steal from Peter to pay Paul, liberals can always rely on Paul's vote…. But, please don't mistake that for being any mainstream, legitimate political position.

  13. Truth hurts  •  Jul 18, 2017 at 5:02 pm

    FOX news, the Washington Times and WND. We're far from kind. Trump played a big part in the northern movement. Obama is a refined gentleman, trump is a n egomaniacal blow hard.

  14. Richard  •  Jul 20, 2017 at 10:14 am

    Obama is a man of integrity, Trump has none. It's not much more complicated than that. Michael knows this to be true, he's pretty much admitted it in the past.

  15. Rizzo  •  Jul 21, 2017 at 9:28 am

    Integrity = If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor. If you like your plan, you can keep your plan. An average family can expect to see their healthcare costs drop by $2500 per year.

    I guess those of you who worship Obama have a different definition of what INTEGRITY is.

Tell Us What You Think

All fields required. The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. By using this website you agree to accept our Terms of Use.

Medhead

Listen Commercial FREE  |  On-Demand
Login Join
Advertisement
Advertise with us Advertisement
Advertisement

Follow Michael

The Michael Medved Show - Mobile App

Download from App Store Get it on Google play
Advertisement
Advertisement
Michael Medved's History Store Also available on TuneIn