I've read a few people musing on a scenario that hadn't occurred to me concerning the dereliction of duty by the press as regards Obama and his led from behind Libya debacle: what happens if Obama wins a narrow victory next week, a victory so narrow that it will be entirely legitimate to credit the press for this great beneficence, and then in a couple of months the truth about Benghazi comes out and it's very, very damaging to Obama, so damaging that he essentially loses the credibility to govern? That sounds like a scenario that is both plausible and extremely troubling.
Right now I'm predicting a narrow win for Obama - the way I see it it's either going to be a comfortable win for Romney or a squeaker for Obama, and I'm assuming the latter if only because I wanna prepare myself for the worst. The press' work when it comes to reporting on and analyzing Libya has been shameful, embarrassing - and I'm not just talking about what happened in Benghazi, I'm talking about the whole Libyan fiasco from start to wherever the hell we are now - a war dreamt up in the delusional uber left minds of Power and Slaughter and some besotted French philosophe - an assine war fought in an assine way - and while I'm at it go ahead and throw in the press' coverage of Obama's entire foreign policy when it comes to his mishandling of Russia, of Iran, of Syria, of the putative Arab Spring, his grotesque mishandling of Israel - and then Libya - and let's not forget the transparent hypocrisy [transparent to me anyway] behind his approach to Afghanistan! [And for the kitchen sink I'll toss in the hypocrisy of the Asia pivot too - you don't get to pivot if you're cutting the military, if you're shrinking the navy - the two things don't go together well at all - the NY TImes may want to run a story about that rather than another accounting of how many horses Ann Romney owns].
So, yeah, the MSM is looking real bad here and if Obama wins a narrow victory - which is going to be a very bad thing in and of itself - and then this Benghazi story balloons into a full blown scandal that indicts both Obama and the press, so that it looks like a corrupted press handed Obama a victory he didn't at all deserve - well then, damn right, you've got the ingredients there for some serious problems.
[but wait: see this for one - possibly the media is starting to figure out just what a dangerous game it is playing - raises question: is media bias a part of a deliberate effort to distort news for Obama's benefit or is the bias simply a result of judgement being impaired by a lack of detachment coming from fact that so many in the media are overly sympathetic to a liberal point of view? Could be a bit of both but I really think it's more the former - to me these people are too smart to not be aware of what's going on - then again I have had plenty of arguments with lefties whom I'd consider pretty bright and it constantly amazes me how resistant they are to the idea that their reasoning may be flawed and their views tainted by perjury - in my experience smart conservatives are much more open to admitting error and I'm guessing that's because, in my opinion anyway, the empirical scepticism you find at the heart of great, seminal thinkers like Locke, Hume and Burke is the chief attribute of true conservatism - liberals are much more defined by idealism - idealists tend towards doctrinaire extremism and extremists don't like admitting they're wrong]
