Accuracy in Media

The Washington Post is hopelessly liberal on many social and economic issues, but on foreign policy its editorial board displays streaks of brilliance. Consider the June 4 editorial, “The West shows no willingness to defend freedom against Russia,” on how Russia’s invasion of Ukraine continues unabated.

Look at some of the charges leveled by the Post against Obama, German Chancellor Angela Merkel and other Western leaders:

  • “The president and his European partners are going only so far as they perceive they can without unduly upsetting Mr. Putin.”
  • Obama “sidestepped Poland’s request for permanent U.S. or NATO bases on its territory.”
  • The new Ukrainian leader asked for weapons and training, but “got a promise from Mr. Obama of $5 million in non-lethal equipment, including radios and goggles. It would have been less insulting to have offered nothing.”
  • Putin “has not given up his strategy of using force to undermine Ukraine’s stability and to compromise its independence. Given the West’s wobbly response, why would he?”

In a May 19 editorial, “Russia’s interference in Ukraine’s national election must carry consequences,” it said that “President Obama, German Chancellor Angela Merkel and other E.U. leaders must also confront the reality that the latest ‘red line’ they drew for Mr. Putin has been ignored. That must lead to the consequences they have promised: meaningful sanctions on the pillars that prop up the Russian economy.”

The “red line” has been crossed, but no additional sanctions have been forthcoming.

The Post, however, finds appeasement in other areas of the world.

In a May 29 editorial, “U.S. sanctions against Venezuelan officials may bring them to the table,” the paper urged Obama to apply sanctions against Marxist officials in Venezuela, in order to send a message protesting their crackdown on pro-freedom protesters. Obama has not acted against the regime.

In a May 27 editorial, “President Obama continues his retreat from Afghanistan,” the paper essentially said that Obama was going to abandon the country to the Taliban and al Qaeda. This, the editorial said, is on top of the following:

  • Obama “reduced the U.S. military presence in Iraq to zero.”
  • “After helping to topple Libyan dictator Moammar Gaddafi in 2011, he made sure no U.S. forces would remain.”
  • “He has steadfastly stayed aloof, except rhetorically, from the conflict in Syria.”

A May 3 editorial, “America’s global role deserves better support from Obama,” looked at the risks: “Understandable and predictable though this latest iteration of the United States’ perennial isolationist temptation might be, it must be resisted. Though less visible than the costs of U.S. efforts to maintain world order, the benefits, to Americans and to the world, are far greater: They include the huge financial advantages the United States reaps because of the preeminence of the dollar, a vast expansion in poverty-reducing world trade and—despite many contradictions in, and lapses of, U.S. policy—a net gain in individual freedom and national self-determination.”

But it would be a mistake to say that Obama’s foreign policy is isolationist. After all, the Accuracy in Media Citizens’ Commission on Benghazi has produced evidence that the massacre in Benghazi was the result of Obama “switching sides” in the war on terror, from opposing to supporting al Qaeda. It is this flip-flop that accounts for the release of five terrorists in exchange for Army deserter Bowe Bergdahl.

Obama’s foreign policy has been to put America on the side of Islamists and jihadists throughout the world. He has not avoided taking sides, which is isolationism. He has taken sides.

It is significant that the government of Qatar was the broker in the Bergdahl deal. Qatar was also a middle man for Obama’s pro-Muslim Brotherhood policy in Egypt. This policy backfired when the Muslim Brotherhood government was overthrown. As a result, the U.S. is today without influence in Egypt, and the Russians are moving in.

Indeed, the Russians seem to be moving in all around the world, taking advantage of Obama’s foreign policy to their own advantage. Is it just an accident?

The Post and other liberal media never took seriously the revelations over five years ago of Obama’s involvement in a communist network that included the President’s childhood mentor in Hawaii, pro-Soviet Communist Party operative Frank Marshall Davis. But Davis is the one who filled Obama’s young head full of notions about America’s evil influence in the world through colonialism and imperialism. It appears that Obama still holds these notions in his head.

Obama came into the Oval Office determined to reverse America’s gains in the world and put our once-great nation on the side of those he views as the forces of liberation.

The Russians are not the Soviets, but they seem to be close enough to satisfy Obama. That is what explains his abject failure to support the brave people of Ukraine as they struggle for freedom and independence.

As for German Chancellor Merkel, we cannot find any mention in the Post or other major media of the blockbuster book, The First Life of Angela M, which examines her secret life in East Germany as an ideologue for a communist youth group.

After a series of foreign policy decisions that, even according to The Washington Post, leave the forces of freedom on defense and in retreat, it is time to consider the unthinkable: leading Western governments, including the U.S. and Germany, have been infiltrated. These policies that benefit our enemies and adversaries are not accidental.

On a practical level, it is apparent that the same security clearance process that failed to detect Bradley Manning and Edward Snowden has failed us at the highest levels of government. In fact, many people may be surprised to learn that there is no security clearance process for the highest offices in this land.

The Post has carefully described our current peril. With the damage to the nation accelerating at almost every level, and across the world stage, does The Washington Post have a suggestion about how America can address this problem? If the answer is not impeachment, then what should or can we do to protect the nation?

We anxiously await an editorial on the subject.

Ready to fight back against media bias?
Join us by donating to AIM today.


  • IngeC

    Great analysis!
    It is no secret – anybody with eyes open can see it – that Obama and Jarrett have strategically placed stealth agents who are ‘all’ muslim brotherhood members into highly sensitive government positions such as NSA, DOD, FBI and DHS among many others.
    Yes – we have been compromised!

  • stringman

    Good God! I just looked up a speech that Brennan gave to an audience of Arabic speakers. His command if that language is apparently near flawless. Then he asks them not to reveal what he said to nonarabic speakers. He praises the beauty of Islam and all things Muslim in glowing flowery terms. The speech is subtitled complete with translation. I suppose it’s possible he might not be a convert but, considering Obama’s other appointments and their leanings and, taking into account such things as Jeremiah Wright’s questionable conversion from Muslim to Christian, I definitely have my doubts. Obama’s administration is chocked full of Muslim Brotherhood. Hillary’s right hand girl is from a Muslim Brotherhood family. We’re all Muslim Brotherhood now, brother.

  • terry1956

    Nonsense the Post also has a ” liberal” view on foreign policy with pushing its globalist centralization agenda.
    Two false choices either the Ukraine goes with the extreme evil of Putinism or subjecting its nation to the extreme evil of the EU.
    Our US federal government should not work to push the Ukraine to make such a choice but should help it fight the evils of Putinism, the EU, the UN, the IMF, the World Bank, the WTO,Red China, Moslem Brotherhood and all other globalist rule agendas.
    Now a Ukraine as part of NATO may very well be a good thing as well as NATO itself may be a good thing without the US and Turkey.
    Without the US because we don’t need it, US membership in multinational groups is unconstitutional and its a disabling crutch to Europe to depend on the US so much for defense.
    Turkey should not be a part of the defense group because it does not fit and there is to much Moslem sharia influence in Turkey.
    It also might be best for the UK, and Canada to leave NATO then form an alliance with Australia, New Zealand and some of the current and former Commonwealth nations for defense.

  • terry1956

    No ” we” are not Muslim Brotherhood because ” we” are not members of the ruling class under 20th and so far 21st century goverence theory.
    What Hayek called Omnipotent elected assemblies or that is the central government can do what ever it wants to do, any time it wants to and do it to any person outside the ruling class anytime it wants to because its elected ” by the people” or at least some of the people or in the case of Congress by at least 15% of the people.
    Of course its got to the point since at least the 1950s that in the US the rule is by a fewer number than a majority of the 546 member ruling class (Congress,The VP, the President, US Supreme Court Justices) to a rule of 10 to as little as 6.
    We are now being ruled by the whims of the president and the US Supreme court justices with often only 5 of the 9 justices giving their consent to the president’s whim of rule.
    In the 2008 democrat primary season Obama was the choice of less than 15% of adult Americans able to vote.
    In the 2012 GOP primary of less than 10% made the choice for Romney.
    In the 2012 general thus the combined totals for Romney and Obama for first choice was less than a fourth of those able to vote plus those such as myself who voted in the primary season and general usually could only vote for the names listed on the ballot so actually Rick Santorum was no where near the best choice for president but he was the best choice in my view of the names on the GOP primary ballot in Tennessee.
    In other words today we are far away from anything that can logically be called consent of the govern in the US.
    Other nations are worse but America is suppose to be an exceptional beacon on a hill.

  • stringman

    No doubt about it. We’ve come a long long way from “No taxation without representation.”. The founders would be utterly sickened. Will the voters finally wake in November? Doubtful. But if they’ve had no understanding about recent goings on, what chance is there that they will suddenly get a clue?
    By the by, “We’re all Muslim Brotherhood now” was just an attempt at sarcasm.

  • RightVote

    This is AMAZING!
    Comments found on this site and others…….Give MORE info than you can ‘find’ in the press!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • stringman

    Studies have shown that a strong majority of the press vote democrat. That includes Fox News and their contributors. Apparently they are ill informed too.

  • RightVote

    I agree!
    Follow the BLAZE The Glenn Beck Programs!

  • Dekilterated

    Obama should be impeached and every Dumbocart along with him.