In totalitarian countries, like modern-day China and Venezuela and the old Soviet Union, government implements control of the press in order to control the message and stifle dissent. By doing so, they keep the people uninformed of what they are doing and unable to coalesce their dissent into action.
But this country was different. The right to dissent was one of our foundational principles. Our Founders intended for us to be able to call into question every decision of the government and our leaders in order to hold them accountable. If the light of truth was allowed to expose every action taken by the government, there would be no way for the government to quell unrest or dissent and politicians who were abusing the public trust would be removed or voted out of office.
Note, I said this country was different. Unfortunately, it no longer is. Most of the press, for a multitude of misguided reasons, has not chosen to honor their First Amendment rights to report truth, to investigate what is going on in the halls of power or to be a voice of the people. Instead, the press has traded their place as the “Fourth Estate” and become a virtual Fifth Column. Rather than side with the people and expose those in power for what they really are, they take every opportunity to bash the traditional values that made this country great and consistently embrace the role of official government, or Democratic Party, mouthpiece.
How can I say this? An Obama official has admitted as much. Anita Dunn, interim White House communications director, in a conference recorded in the Dominican Republic in January 2009, stated:
One of the reasons we did so many of the David Plouffe videos was not just for our supporters but also because it was a way for us to get our message out without having to actually talk to reporters. We just put that out there and make them write what Plouffe had said, as opposed to Plouffe doing an interview with a reporter. So it was very much we controlled it, as opposed to the press controlled it. And it did not always make us popular with the press. Btu we increasingly by the general election very rarely did we communicate through the press anything that we didn't absolutely control.
Senator Obama himself did a lot of local television. We went to as much live television as posisble. So it couldn't be edited when it came to him, it was live. So that he could speak in a longer than 12-second sound byte. So that what the voters heard we determined, as opposed to some editor in a TV station.
For her to be so candid is tacit admission of two things. First, progressives of Obama’s ilk have no respect for the American media, save for a few outlets like FoxNews which they are attempting to silence. If there was any healthy respect for the media, they wouldn’t have the gall to make such outrageous statements without fear of stirring up a media hornets’ nest. Second, such a statement proves that the press is in their back pocket since they have no fear that most media outlets will ever investigate anything that could prove damaging to this administration. This includes such items of interest as the birth certificate controversy, dissent in the scientific community about global warming, or the money trail behind the health care reform fraud being perpetuated on the American public. She said that the press didn’t like it, but you couldn’t tell that from the fawning media coverage during the campaign or even during the first nine months of this administration.
And evidently, we're going to let them get away with it.