The LA Times vs. Trump

This past week, the Los Angeles Times ran daily and lengthy editorials outlining their numerous problems with President Trump. The April 4 editorial was entitled "Why the president lies." The Times claims that Trump has an "apparent disregard for fact so profound as to suggest that he may not see much practical distinction between lies, if he believes they serve him, and the truth." Regular readers of this blog may recall the countless times I have discussed how for the left (people like Obama, Reid and Pelosi) the truth is not a value. Rather, their approach to politics is that the ends justify the means. If lying works, they lie. Of course, when Obama, Reid and Pelosi were in charge, the Times was completely unaware of the concept that for some the ends justify the means. Now that Trump, a Republican, is in charge, they've awakened to the idea that politicians may lie.

My favorite example of the Dems using the approach of the ends justify the means is a quote from Harry Reid. When Romney was running against Obama, then Senate Majority leader Reid spoke on the Senate floor and accused Romney of not paying any federal income tax. It was a total lie, of course. A number of years later, a reporter asked Reid if he wanted to apologize for that comment about Romney. In reply, Reid said this: "Well, he (Romney) didn't win, did he?" A perfect example of Reid demonstrating no moral qualms about the lie, because maybe that lie helped reelect Obama. The ends justify the means.

Another lie, given little attention by the mainstream media, was the claim that a movie/video trailer was responsible for the assault on our consulate in Benghazi. Obama and Clinton told that lie. It was only a couple of months before the 2012 election, and the spin from Obama was that bin Laden was dead, and terrorism was defeated. So, it was felt that the true story would conflict with that spin. And let's not forget that paragon of honesty, Susan Rice, who went on five Sunday talk shows to repeat the lie about the movie trailer. (Which, although unrelated, certainly makes me want to believe everything she now says about the unmasking and leaking of names of Trump campaign officials.)

The April 5 editorial was entitled "His Authoritarian Vision." The Times is shocked by the fact that Trump has called for "agency budgets to be chopped by up to 30%." Imagine, a President who does not want to see the federal bureaucracy, along with the federal debt, continue to grow exponentially. And, shockingly, Trump has "appointed a string of Cabinet secretaries who were hostile to much of their agencies' missions and the laws they're responsible for enforcing." Would that be like Obama failing to enforce the immigration laws he was responsible for enforcing? Or, ignoring those parts of the Affordable Care Act that he decided should not be enforced before his campaign for reelection, lest it negatively affect the vote for him.

The April 6 editorial was entitled "The War on Journalism." The Times takes great offense at Trump referring to "fake news," and referring to journalists as the "enemies of the people." Calling journalists the "enemies of the people" is not something he should have said. Yes, reporters are almost always going to be biased against Republicans. And when Trump calls out specific instances of bias, I have no problem with it. But the words of Trump apparently upset the Times far more than the actions of Obama. The Times apparently realized how it would look if they completely ignored the ways Obama mistreated the press, and therefore noted: "President Obama's press operation tried to exclude Fox News reporters from interviews, blocked many officials from talking to journalists and, most troubling, prosecuted more national security whistle-blowers and leakers than all previous presidents combined."

Let's not forget the words of Obama and his top advisers early on, as they all appeared on mainstream and cable news channels, asserting that Fox News was not a real news organization. Or how Obama had Fox News reporter James Rosen surveilled - watching his comings and goings, and collecting his emails and phone records. Or how the Obama Administration seized telephone records of AP reporters and editors. No, for the Times it's all about some of the words Trump has said; words Trump says because he actually fights back, instead of taking the abuse - like this series by the Times.