Is it a left-right thing, or is it a racial double-standard thing or both?
Is it undeniable evidence that the Big Media is leftist/racist?
Nothing has more power to slap folks in the face with reality than a stark, no-other-explanation, juxtaposition like this.
Of course, many haven't noticed the difference, haven't the slightest clue about this.
But what if they had to watch a documentary? What if a massive marketing campaign drew them in by the millions to watch a documentary contrasting the shockingly unfair, unbalanced, illogical, irrational treatment received by the two starkly different leaders? Would most of them not change their minds suddenly about the credibility, integrity and agenda of the Big Media?
Suppose the hypothetical documentary included such a narrative:
There is a powerful irony at work here. President Obama is well on his way to ruining the American economy and reducing the nation’s defensive posture before an increasingly threatening world. The evidence for so unflattering an assessment is bluntly undeniable, at least for those who have managed to resist hypnosis. Yet he is staunchly defended by the MSM, receives accolades from a vast and robust constituency of devoted supporters, including the Oslo bunch, and is crowned by a nimbus of invincibility. Prime Minister Harper, on the other hand, finds himself constantly struggling to maintain a minority government, faces the prospect of no-confidence motions against his administration and ad hoc coalitions of the disgruntled, and is regarded by the teeming number of leftist nannies in this country as “scary” and of nurturing a “secret agenda” — an agenda, be it said, which is transparently conservative and responsible. If there is a scary and secret agenda to be feared, it is not here.We must take the American Big Media and the Canadian Big Media to task. They're essentially equally unfair and unbalanced, in favor of the Left, no matter what. They don't care about reality, about truth, but rather about screwing with the Peoples' heads via propaganda and spin masquerading as serious news delivered by serious-looking people in serious-looking suits.
The difference between the two heads of state could not be more palpable, not only in their foreign and domestic policies, but also in the treatment they are accorded by the press. One is a media darling and an absolute disaster in every initiative he has undertaken; the other is often the target of smug ingratitude and denunciation for weathering a major economic crisis and for comporting himself with dignity and honor in the international arena. Harper is condemned as a “control freak” for trying to run a tight ship; Obama is worshipped as a “sort of god” for unleashing a perfect storm. Like any politician, the Canadian prime minister has not always made the most astute decisions and has plainly committed tactical errors from time to time. What else is new? But tactical errors are by no means equivalent to strategic blunders — another salient distinction between the two leaders.
The results of their respective approaches, methods, and actions are obvious. The American dollar is sinking fast but the Canadian currency continues strong. Canada, for all its inevitable troubles, remains a viable nation; the U.S. is structurally insolvent and appears to be coming apart at the seams. The U.S. is sagging toward a single-payer health care system that will deliver interminable wait times and insensible bureaucracies; Canada is gradually coming out of it with a two-tier alternative.
With respect to the Middle East flashpoint, which Obama has made the centerpiece of his foreign policy, Harper has clearly understood, as Obama has not, that the problem is not the natural growth of Israeli settlements but Palestinian violence, corruption, mendacity, and intransigence. Harper, we recall, was the first international leader to repudiate the infamous Durban II conference — as the U.S. dithered — and the first to instruct his delegation at the UN to boycott Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s podium. Generally speaking, in their dealings with the geopolitical world, Harper emerges smelling of roses, Obama of something else. Nevertheless, the irony of celebrity inversion persists. The most that Harper can hope for is respect, much of it grudging, while Obama is laurelled and lionized.
Get the inconvenient movie the big-liar global-warming alarmists don't want you to see:
Not Evil Just Wrong - the true cost of warming hysteria.