The New York TImes ran a story about mr. Obama’s silence on virtually every major issue in the country and the world in recent months.
WASHINGTON — In the nearly two weeks since Egypt’s military seized power, President Obama has promoted a better federal bureaucracy, given a medal to George Lucas of “Star Wars” fame and had former President George Bush to the White House for lunch. What he has not done is publicly address the violent upheaval in Cairo. <source>
The article goes on to speculate about whether he might be emulating the style of Dwight Eisenhower. The reporter spoke to Jim Newton, author of “Eisenhower: The White House Years”, who had this to say:
“In those senses, Obama does appear to me to be taking a page from Eisenhower’s playbook,” Mr. Newton said. “What I don’t know, however, is how aggressively Obama is working out of view on these matters. The essence of Eisenhower’s hidden hand, of course, is that there was real work going on that people didn’t know at the time. If that’s true now, then Obama really is emulating Ike. If, on the other hand, he’s simply doing nothing or very little, that would be passivity, not hidden-hand leadership.”
Newton’s statement is a simple “Either / Or”, in which Obama’s abdication is something positive (“Hidden Hand”) or negative (“Passivity”).
So here’s the kicker: what headline ran on top of this NYT article?
WHITE HOUSE MEMO
In Second Term, Obama Is Seen as Using ‘Hidden Hand’ Approach
This headline is a very clear vote by the New York Times in favor of the positive explanation of the “Either/Or”, when the article itself makes it quite plain that this view of his actions is not a consensus view at all.
And so the Liberal media cheer him on, down the road to the destruction of the United States.