WATCH Network Anchor Actually Ask Jay Carney Tough Questions

Though the mainstream media is still firmly in the tank for Obama and his agenda, a few defectors have become more vocal as the president’s approval ratings continue to sink to unprecedented depths.

ABC News host Jonathan Karl recently sat down for an interview with White House Press Secretary Jay Carney, during which he sought an explanation for this administration’s monumental failures. He began the recent segment with recent polling data that shows almost two-thirds of Americans think Obama is incapable of making sound decisions for the nation.

Carney agreed that, throughout 2013, his boss led “a Washington that did not deliver for the American people.”

He promised, however, that Obama will not be constrained this year, noting his intention to “work with Congress where he can and bypass Congress when necessary.”

The interview took place just prior to Tuesday’s State of the Union address; and Karl cited a number of proposals during last year’s address that have since remained unfulfilled.

“None of that happened,” he said of issues such as raising the minimum wage, passing immigration reform, and implementing stricter gun control legislation. “Isn’t this year only going to be harder?”

After Carney expressed optimism regarding the administration’s radical agenda, Karl responded by bringing up ObamaCare, a law he said is “shaping up to be the biggest headache for Democrats in 2014.”

With only about 4 in 10 Americans expressing approval of the legislation, the interviewer wondered how much Obama would be willing to lose in the pursuit of the unpopular law.

“Will it have been worth it if you lose the Senate?” he asked. “You already lost the House because of the healthcare law.”

Carney responded: “It is absolutely worth it – no matter what happens.”

Karl remained on offense as he brought up income inequality, a key theme of the upcoming address.

Though Carney tried desperately to cast blame on a Bush administration that ended more than five years ago, Karl countered with an argument millions of Americans have been making for years.

He asserted that both the economic crisis of 2008 and the Bush presidency “are in the rearview mirror,” asking Carney, “Doesn’t the president bear some responsibility, his policies, for the fact that the poverty rate has gone up, the gap between rich and poor is even greater?”

Obama’s press secretary could only respond with a talking point that the current situation has been “in the making for over 30 years.”

It appears Carney is interested in blaming Reagan and Bush for the utter failure of his boss.

As the interview ended, Karl brought up the secrecy with which the Obama administration operates.

Carney alleged that the White House provides an “extraordinary amount of information and access to reporters and work[s] every day to provide more.”

Karl’s interview, though comprised of fairly hard-hitting questions, should not have made news on its own. Holding those in power accountable for their actions should be a primary function of the press.

Unfortunately, too many sycophants within mainstream media are more interested in currying favor from Obama than in exposing his tyranny.

Video: Shocking! Dan Rather Stands Up For Fox News!

Maybe he’s getting mellower as he gets older. Nevertheless, former CBS Evening News anchor Dan Rather surprised conservatives and liberals alike when he defended Fox News against charges that it is part of the Republican Party…

Video: Trey Gowdy Challenges The Press On Benghazi

Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-SC) challenges the media’s knowledge of the events surrounding the Benghazi Embassy attacks on September 11, 2012.

Media Bias On Full Display with Christie Coverage

Photo credit: Gage Skidmore (Creative Commoms)

The duplicity and hypocrisy of the mainstream media coverage of politicians, based on party affiliation, could not have been more in evidence than it was this past week. New Jersey Governor Chris Christie’s scandal was trumpeted across the headlines this week as if it were a five alarm fire, while much more serious scandals with national implications are often hardly reported at all.

It was revealed this week that members of Christie’s staff had intentionally closed four lanes of George Washington Bridge, connecting Manhattan to Fort Lee, New Jersey. Christie’s staff closed the lanes for four days to create a traffic quagmire to punish Fort Lee’s mayor, Mark Sokolich, for not endorsing Christie in his bid for reelection as New Jersey’s governor.

In a two hour, nationally televised press conference, Christie admitted he was “blind sided” by the revelation, and had no prior knowledge of the scheme. Ensuring that someone was held accountable, Christie fired his two aides complicit in the plan.

There are two aspects of this narrative that are immensely disturbing. The first is the media reaction to the story. According to Media Research Center, “In less than 24 hours, the three networks have devoted 17 times more coverage to a traffic scandal involving Chris Christie than they allowed on Barack Obama’s Internal Revenue Service controversy.” MRC documented 34 minutes and 28 seconds of coverage by ABC, CBS, and NBC dedicated to the Christie scandal, versus a scant “two minutes and eight seconds for the IRS targeting of Tea Party groups” over the past six months.

To a reasonable person, the story of potential political bullying by a governor, closing lanes on a bridge, can in nowise be 17 times more significant than a president who uses the most onerous agency of the federal government to do his bullying against his political enemies. To a reasonable and rational electorate, the obvious bias in reporting would cause a mass exodus from the mainstream media until they started reporting accurately and with equitability, without regard for party affiliation.

The media have been raising the question whether Christie can be believed when he claims he knew nothing about it. Yet they are unsurprisingly reticent when it comes to Obama’s inexorable “I didn’t know about it until I read it in the paper” soliloquies he employs to excuse his and his administration’s irresponsibility.

In fact, the mainstream media have been AWOL in reporting just the few foibles and lies listed here: “I will have the most transparent administration in history”; “The stimulus will fund shovel-ready jobs”; “I am focused like a laser on creating jobs”; “The IRS is not targeting anyone”; “It was a spontaneous riot about a movie”; “The public will have five days to look at every bill that lands on my desk”; “It’s the previous president’s fault”; “Whistle blowers will be protected in my administration”; “I am not spying on American citizens”; “It’s just like shopping at Amazon”; “I knew nothing about ‘Fast and Furious’”; “I knew nothing about what happened in Benghazi”; and perhaps the best of all, “I will restore trust in government.” If any of these claims had been uttered by our previous president, the press would still be harping on them.

After the copious media coverage of this event, the second most disturbing element is the public reaction. A resident of Fort Lee and one of Christie’s constituents, Robert Tessaro, raised a valid point. He said, “I hope this continues to haunt him. No matter what he knew and didn’t know, these were his people and the culture he created in the state, and it’s not right.”

If that principle applies to Christie, a state executive, shouldn’t it apply even more aptly with the executive leader of our nation? Why are so few of Obama’s constituents raising the same question? Why is Obama exempted from culpability in the creation of a culture of corruption and incompetence in the executive branch?

It was refreshing to actually see someone held accountable for something in government, as Christie dismissed those involved with what is now being dubbed “Bridgegate.” We have witnessed so many faux pas, blunders, mistakes, and outright lies over the past five years at the national level; and there has been little accountability. When people are hired, especially for the public good, and they, by their actions, tarnish the people’s trust in their integrity and competence, they should be held accountable.

Here are just a few of those who have contributed to the culture of corruption at the national level, by deceit and obfuscation, and have not been held accountable: Eric Holder, Timothy Geithner, Van Jones, Susan Rice, Lois Lerner, Hillary Clinton, and Kathleen Sibelius. In fact, books have been written documenting the culture of corruption in the White House. If Christie is to be responsible for the culture in his administration, shouldn’t Obama be held accountable for his, especially considering the gravity, breadth, and impact of the latter?

Holding a position of public trust requires responsibility and accountability. Not only has very little been shouldered by this administration, but also the media have done little to hold them accountable. It shouldn’t be too much to ask for the media to be equitable and fair in their coverage of elected officials, irrespective of party affiliation. And we, the people, should demand it of them!


Associated Press award winning columnist Richard Larsen is President of Larsen Financial, a brokerage and financial planning firm in Pocatello, Idaho and is a graduate of Idaho State University with degrees in Political Science and History and coursework completed toward a Master’s in Public Administration.  He can be reached at


Photo credit: Gage Skidmore (Creative Commoms)

Bounty Placed On Chris Christie’s Head

Staff Annoucement

The media gets under my skin. They trumpet and boast about honesty and truth; but in reality, they’re about as dishonest as the politicians.

Compare, for instance, the way they’ve handled Obama’s scandals to Chris Christie’s latest debacle.

The latter, “Bridge-gate,” has given Big Media a scandal they can really sink their teeth into. Bridge-gate is being blasted from coast to coast in above-the-fold banner headlines.

The coverage on cable TV and even the network news shows is so detailed, it’s nauseating. (And I say that as a seasoned critic of New Jersey Governor Chris Christie, the media’s primary target.)

In fact, according to a report from the Media Research Center, Bridge-gate has received approximately 17 times more coverage in one day than the Obama IRS scandal received in months.

RINO on the Loose!

Bridge-gate centers on allegations that, during the month of September 2013, Governor Christie’s staff encouraged the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey to close several lanes of the George Washington Bridge leading out of Ft. Lee, N.J.

Now, as I said above, I’m no fan of Christie. There are plenty of reasons to dislike him, including his status as the darling of a GOP establishment that’s betrayed the American middle class time and time again. They want Christie as the GOP candidate precisely because they know he won’t change things in D.C.

Additionally, he’s a RINO (Republican in Name Only) who helped Barack Obama win the last presidential election by locking arms in the aftermath of Hurricane Sandy. Christie was at Obama’s side during a critical news cycle, and Obama’s support soared during the run-up to the presidential balloting.

Christie has also been a critic of Congressional and Tea Party initiatives to reign in out-of-control government spending and growth, which are initiatives close to my heart.

But Christie did exactly what should be done when a scandal erupts. He’s disclosed all that he knows, apologized, and fired the offending aides for lying to him. He labeled the incident as “stupid” and “deceitful.” He denied any knowledge of it, and he took responsibility for falling short.

Additionally, Christie announced that he asked Bill Stepien to withdraw his nomination to lead the New Jersey Republican Party. He also asked Stepien to resign his consultancy with the Republican Governors Association, which Christie runs.

Finally, during Governor Christie’s 107-minute news conference, he was honest and contrite. I’ve never seen Obama be contrite about anything.

The Obama-Friendly Media

In fact, in dealing with his own scandals, Obama has done the complete opposite of Christie at every juncture. And the president has a list of scandals that are much more serious than Bridge-gate.

Sadly, the media has continually whitewashed and pooh-poohed Obama’s crimes.

Take the Benghazi cover-up, which was followed with an intense media barrage to convince America that our Libyan ambassador was murdered over a video. Meanwhile, the source of most of the lies, Susan Rice, was given a big promotion for her spin doctoring.

With Fast and Furious, the scandal in which the U.S. Department of Justice put guns in the hands of Mexican drug cartels, well… nothing has happened. Attorney General Eric Holder lied about his involvement, yet he still has a job. I guess the repeated calls for his removal fell on deaf ears.

So when it comes to Christie’s scandal, the media is showing its true colors. It will happily go to bat for Obama but won’t pull any punches for the Governor of New Jersey.

Personally, I won’t lose any sleep if Christie’s political career ends here in a traffic jam on the roads to New York City.

I just wish the news media would be honest enough to hold Obama to the same standards.


This commentary originally appeared at and is reprinted with permission.