by
John Nolte
To begin with, you can't look at the mainstream media as a biased or out-of-touch entity. Instead, you have to look at the media for what it really is: a gaggle of left-wing operatives disguised as journalists who use objectivity and a near-monopoly to control the news and information-narrative all in an effort to damage the Right and promote the Left.
As we've seen since the rise of the
Internet and the media criticism that has become much of its muse, the
media cannot be reasoned with, made to see the error of its ways, or
shamed into doing its job honestly. This is a corrupt institution and if
you love your country, the only moral approach in dealing with it
should be to do whatever you can to put it out of business.
And "business" is why the media fears
the Supreme Court decision known as "Citizens United," a First Amendment
victory that allows individuals and corporations -- through the use of
the dreaded super PAC -- the right to spend as much money as they want
on electioneering. Because the "business" of the media is not the
dissemination of information for the public good or even commercial
profit, but rather the furthering of leftist causes, what most terrifies
the media is the competition for the narrative these super PACS will
hopefully create.
But to understand how terrified the
media is of super PACs, you have to examine just how hypocritical and
un-American their objections are.
First off, at its very core, the media
is objecting to free and unlimited political speech -- the very thing
protected by the very first Amendment. The media's outrage that there
are now no longer restrictions on how much money a company or individual
can spend to further a political cause, is the same as expressing
outrage that that most sacred of American rights -- unlimited political
speech -- is no longer limited by a tyrannical government.
But most hypocritically glaring is the
fact that Obama, the Left, and the media (but I repeat myself) have
always enjoyed many of the very same rights "Citizens United" has now
given to everyone -- but they wanted those rights all to themselves.
Prior to "Citizens United," a private
or public sector union (funded with our tax dollars) could pretty much
spend as much as they desired on electioneering (almost 100% of it
benefiting the left) -- a right not extended to the company that hired
these union workers or those among us not in a union.
Fact: In 2008, unions spent hundreds of millions of dollars to elect Obama.
Fact : In 2008, you heard almost no
media outcry against all of that "outside money affecting elections."
Today, that's all you hear, especially after a Republican victory like
the one last week in Wisconsin.
Prior to "Citizens United," the only
corporations, big or small, allowed to spend unlimited amounts of money
to push a political agenda were … media companies.
ABC, NPR, CBS, NBC, MSNBC, CNN, The Washington Post, Politico, The Los Angeles Times, Boston Globe, The New York Times,
and on and on, are all corporations, and in some cases, part of
gargantuan multi-national corporations -- and yet before "Citizens
United" not a single one lived under political spending restrictions.
In other words, while NBC could spend billions through the Nightly News, the Today Show, its entertainment programming like Saturday Night Live,
and MSNBC to openly shill for leftist causes, every other corporation
could not. While Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert had a huge corporation
(Viacom) amplifying their furthering of leftist causes, every other
individual in the country had their free speech restricted.
Furthermore, if you were a General
Electric and owned all or part of NBC, you could openly use that branch
of your corporation to spend as much money as was possible to push for
left-wing causes.
Think about this: pre-"Citizens
United," the system was so immoral and gamed, that the purchase of a
newspaper, television network, or cable news outlet is what gave you a
workaround the campaign finance laws.
Thanks to "Citizens United," though,
what you now have are mainstream media corporations forced to compete on
a level playing field with other individuals and corporations, who can
now spend as much money as MSNBC and Politico and The Washington Post, etc. to affect the outcomes of our nation's politics.
And this is why the media so loathes "Citizens United" and those beautiful super PACs that have blossomed as a result.
This is also why the media's reactions to super PACs has been panic, lies, threats, and bullying.
The media is not only openly coordinating its attacks on super PACs (with the Obama campaign), but it's also coordinating attacks on those who dare run or donate to super PACs. Politico's Maggie Haberman outing a Romney super PAC donor's silly misdemeanor criminal record isn't reporting,
it's blackmail and sending a message to others that there's a price to
pay for muscling into the business the corrupt media once had a monopoly
on.
Rather shamelessly, the media is now openly lying about the effect "Citizens United" had on Wisconsin -- lying through its teeth.
The New York Times, CNN, NBC,
NPR, Politico, Comedy Central, unions, and all the rest are nothing
more than super PACs, and now they're mad as hell that everyone's
allowed in on the game.
