One of the recurring themes I have noticed is the hypocrasy of the Mainstream Media. Their insistance on calling themselves unbiased, when in fact they are anything but. The fact they are biased should not be taken as some sort of evil omen. It is human nature after all. The fact they deny it should be taken as an indication of their credibility. In otherwords, the fact they cannot even tell the truth when the truth is so nakedly obvious indicates they are not truthful about anything.
And so the latest shows again not only their bias, their hypocrasy, but their dishonesty as well. For anyone who has listened to Rush Limbaugh lately, they will have noticed he has ratcheted up his rhetoric on the Obama Administration. That there is no love lost between Obama and Limbaugh is a given, and given their respective political ideologies, not unexpected. So lately, Limbaugh has taken to calling the Obama Administration a "Regime". With all of its totalitarian overtones. That may seem a bit extreme to some, but hardly (again) surprising as Limbaugh has never pretended to be anything but biased.
Well, his use of the word Regime has caught the attention of the MSM. So much so that they are going out of their way to lie about it! Chris Matthews, he of the tingling leg fame, outright lied when he yelled at Limbaugh that:
I've never seen language like this in the American press referring to an elected representative of the government, elected in a totally fair, democratic, American election, we'll have another one in November, we'll have another one for president in a couple years, fair, free, and wonderful democracy we have in this country, and this guy, this walrus, underwater, makes fun of this administration, calling it a regime. We know that word "regime." It was used by recent presidential -- by George Bush, regime change. You go to war with regimes. Regimes are tyrannies. They're juntas, they're military coups. The use of the word regime in American political parlance is unacceptable, and someone should tell the walrus to stop using it.
"Never seen"? I guess to a weasler of words that would be true since speech is heard and not seen. However, Matthews is a liar. Pure and simple. For it was HE that first used the term "regime" to describe the administration! What? He called the Obama Administration a "regime"? No, he called the Bush 43 Administration that back in 2002 when asking Al Sharpton a question: "What do you think this says of the Bush regime?"
Politics is mostly a heated argument about points of view. It is doubtful that anyone is going to be swayed by cool logic as it rarely exists in the arena of politics. But it does you no good to outright lie about your position or your opponents position in this day and age of the Interenet and Google and Bing. All it does is make sure you are no longer a source for anything debatable in the political arena.
But if you are a "journalist" in the Mainstream Media, it also means you are no longer a journalist, but either a paid of unpaid shill for a cause. In this case, while it could be debated that Matthews was some kind of biased journalist in the past, clearly now he has stepped over the line and become a Gibbs-lite for the Obama administration. That his current employer sees no problem with that indicates they are on the payroll as well, and cannot be taken as any type of serious journalistic enterprise.
Should the Obama Administration attempt to ostracize them as they did with the "biased" news coverage of Fox News? That is for the Obama administration to decide (but do not hold your breath). Clearly we see that the Obama administration cares nothing for journalism, but they sure do love sycophants.