News Bias:Couric/CBS Adopt Strategy of Obama

As former Democratic National Committee Chair Terry McAuliff stated recently, 'There is no doubt that the mainstream media is in the tank for Obama.'

This happens to be one of the few times McAuliff has been completely honest in his entire political career.

As if reading from a script written by Howard Dean, the Democratic National Committee, and the Barack Obama campaign, Katie Couric began Thursday's CBS Evening News with the headline that 'Republicans deliver a double-pronged attack against Barack Obama.'

Actually they did absolutely no such thing. But Barack Obama claims they did. Funny how in these instances the guilty party shouts first and shouts the loudest.

Here is the series of events to led to the Couric/CBS News smear of the GOP, in chronological order.

President Bush had traveled to Israel to commemorate the 60th anniversary of the creation of the Jewish nation in their native land. In the President's prepared remarks before the Israeli Knesset, Mr. Bush described those who propose negotiating with terrorists and state sponsors of terror as appeasement-driven.

He also compared them to those who advocated appeasement with Adolf Hitler even as the dictator conducted his bloody scourge throughout Europe prior to WW II.

Winston Churchill had to contend with such appeasement-driven boneheads in the British Parliament in the years leading up to the Nazi attack against Great Britain. There, too, British politicians such as Prime Minister Chamberlain advocated 'sitting down and talking to Hitler.'

Chamberlain did exactly that, returning home to London with a treaty signed by Hitler himself.

Churchill was not impressed.

And, as Churchill had warned, no sooner had the ink dried on the treaty than Hitler had done precisely what he agreed not to do. He invaded Poland. Great Britain had a treaty with Poland in which they agreed to come to Poland's defense if they were attacked. Thus, Britain was automatically thrust into the middle of war.

From the very beginning there have been voices within the U.S. Government, particularly within the Congress, who have advocated policies of appeasement with terrorist states. John Kerry, Nancy Pelosi, Ted Kennedy, Joe Biden, and a host of other Democrats in Congress have urged the President to sit down at the negotiating table with Iran, Iranian President Mahmood Ahmadinejad, and the leaders of Hamas and Hezbollah.

Thus, the concept is nothing new.

But one would have thought that the President had fired the first shot in World War III if one listens exclusively to the mainstream media. Immediately Barack Obama was all over the television news networks, claiming that Bush had attacked him personally in his speech in Israel.

Why would Obama think that Bush had singled him out when there are many others who have advocated appeasement among the Democrats?

Obama did nothing but 'out' himself as one of the guilty parties. As the presumptive Democratic nominee he has consistently advocated 'sitting down at the negotiating table' with terrorist thugs and goons who kill people either because they are not Muslim or because they support Israel.

Thus, Obama was the first to yell. But soon he was joined by his partners in crime, Nancy Pelosi, Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden, John Kerry, and Dick Durbin, among others. They decried and condemned the Bush comments, referring to them as 'beneath the dignity of the office of the President,' and other such nonsense.

In what way did he disparage the office of President? By telling the truth? By reminding Israel that there are those within the U.S. Government who are just as naive and shortsighted as Chamberlain and British politicians before WW II?

This information is of vital concern to Israel's very survival in a dangerous area of the world where they are overwhelmingly outnumbered 99-to-1.

These facts were apparently lost on Couric and company at CBS, who proceeded to read the Democratic playbook word-for-word as they described these events. The very fact that Couric stated that Obama had been 'attacked' by Republicans gave one the impression that he was ganged up on by a group of attack dogs.

And within Obama's strategy for winning the White House is the tactic of making sure it is always inappropriate to criticize him in any way, and in this case, even when they don't intend to. Attacking Obama automatically makes one mean and racist.

And the mainstream media, particularly Couric and CBS News, have bought it hook, line, and sinker.

But this is not all.

The second part of the supposed 'two-pronged attack against Obama' occurred when a CBS reporter asked Republican Presidential candidate John McCain about Bush's remarks and Obama's claims.

McCain correctly mused that it is always a mistake to negotiate with terrorists and that Obama's suggestion to that effect shows his naivete and inexperience. Again, McCain spoke nothing but absolute truth.

Thus, CBS News' template for doing a smear job against Republicans, Bush, and McCain was in place.

Nothing the President said was untrue. Nothing he said did anything but confirm common knowledge about the policy proposals for the Middle East that do, indeed, emphasize appeasement. He never mentioned Barack Obama by name. But it was Obama who seized it and made it all about him.

And not only did CBS News take the Obama script and use it, but they also baited John McCain to respond, not so much to the President's speech, but to Barack Obama's response. And this supposedly amounted to a two-pronged Republican attack against Obama, although the 'second prong' was initiated by a CBS News reporter.

Perhaps Obama, Pelosi, Biden, Kerry, Kennedy, and Durbin should do some serious soul-searching. Their vitriolic responses to the President's words show that those words hit a raw nerve.

And so, ladies and gentlemen of surrender and appeasement, if the shoe fits, wear it. Don't try to make this about Bush when he was merely accurately reporting facts. If you support sitting down at the negotiating table with terrorists who are known to lie and say anything to further their agenda, then say so. We all already know you support these things anyway.