Friday, July 29, 2016

Media React to Hillary's Nomination

Media React to Hillary’s Nomination

by Stephen Lendman

Almost in unison, media scoundrels support Clinton to succeed Obama - without explaining the grave threat to world peace and fundamental freedoms she represents.

The New York Times is typical - virtually serving as her press agent, abandoning journalistic ethics and principles entirely - oozing support for a ruthlessly dangerous presidential aspirant.

Saying she “sacrificed personal ambition for her husband’s political career” ignored the nation’s first ever husband/wife co-presidency, seeking a third term - a rogue partnership, serving monied interests over popular ones for eight painful years.

Every promise Hillary made throughout the campaign, including Thursday night, will be broken straightaway in office if elected - GUARANTEED! 

Yet The Times tried reinventing her as “a steady and patriotic American who would stand up for citizens of all races and creeds and unite the country…”

Can anyone even somewhat knowledgeable about her despicable career buy this rubbish? A cloying same day editorial honored a woman seeking unlimited wealth and power no matter the cost to others.

Times editors went overboard, presenting a false picture of a woman reviled by two-thirds of US voters, believing she’s legally, ethically and morally tainted beyond rehabilitation.

Times editors claiming her public record reflects “a profound service to the nation” belies the hard truth about a she-devil threatening world peace and the fading remnants of a free society at home.

The Times is in bed with pure evil while pretending to support high-minded principles it rejects. Its advocacy on the wrong side of history reflects the sorrowful state of major media in America and other Western societies - agents of wealth, power and privilege, harming the general welfare.

Washington Post editors called Hillary a uniter, not a divider, a force for progressive change - quoting her duplicitous rhetoric without debunking it responsibly.

Saying (h)er challenge between now and November will be to persuade voters that her promis(ing) ‘step-by-step, year-by-year’ progress is more attractive than (Trump’s) reckless and fact-free leadership…” showed Post editors endorsing her lies, ignoring her ruthlessness, while condemning her opponent with no public record on which to judge him.

Wall Street Journal editors took a different view, calling Hillary’s agenda “hope without change,” promises without fulfillment, “the most predictable Democrat in generations.”

Her desire to be Obama’s heir means “status quo, only more of it,” they said. Since 1992, voters know “how she cuts ethical corners and then stonewalls and dissembles when discovered.”

She’s the most reviled Democrat presidential aspirant in party history, electoral rigging needed to anoint her its standard bearer. Attired in white deceptively reflecting purity concealed her villainous evil.

Trump v. Clinton in November assures a predetermined outcome - dirty business as usual prevailing like always, America a sham democracy, in name only.

Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago. He can be reached at 

His new book as editor and contributor is titled "Flashpoint in Ukraine: US Drive for Hegemony Risks WW III."

Visit his blog site at 

Listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network.