The Boston Globe and the Liberal media love to denigrate America. They don’t believe our history is anything to be proud of, they don’t believe our system of government is fundamentally fair, they don’t believe in capitalism and individual liberty, and they don’t believe we are the greatest country on earth and have been since our founding.
The principles of our country were truly groundbreaking. We were the first country to recognize and enshrine the rights of individuals to property, to vote, to freedom, and to be left to our own devices without interference by the government.
There are many people in the world, and in the U.S., who believe otherwise. We can generalize their thoughts as “Socialism,” because in a socialist state, the state makes the rules and the people follow them. Even a socialist democracy like several European states put the individual’s liberty below the needs of society or the state, despite the ability of people to vote their leaders in power. This power is thus incredibly diluted. Once a voter has cast his vote, he has given his consent to the state to make rules over his personal life.
In a Communist system, this is taken a giant step further, because there is no voting, no free and fair elections, no recourse to state power and control. But the two systems are not that different once leaders get into power. Some leaders turn their democracy into a dictatorship, and others just make decisions like they are dictators, perhaps with the knowledge that electing the other party to power is unlikely and unusual.
Our history is not perfect, of course, but we strive to “make perfect” our Union of states. We have many competing interests but above all are individual liberties which no level of state government is allowed to curtail. These rights are enshrined in the Constitution and protected by our courts and all of our elected politicians have sworn an oath to the Constitution, although some are more than willing to put that oath aside if they get elected. And this is one of the many reasons why Donald Trump is so popular. People know that their fundamental rights truly are at risk under just about any of the current crop of Democrat leaders. Lindsay Graham said it best during the Kavanaugh hearing: “Boy, you [Democrats] all want power. God, I hope you never get it.”. (See https://www.vox.com/2018/9/27/17911604/kavanaugh-lindsey-graham-ford-hearings).
President Obama was widely called a socialist when he ran in 2008, and his Party has moved even further to the Left since then. Obama was not successful implementing too many socialist policies, but he did a lot of regulation (which President Trump has been trying to undo) and he managed to pass Obamacare, which is a mild version of socialized medicine.
But Obama’s worst deed was the investigation into the Trump campaign by Obama’s Justice Department and FBI. There were shades of concern, like the IRS’s targeting of “Tea Party” groups and pro-Israel groups, and how Obama tried to cover up the terrorist roots of the Benghazi attack on our consulate which resulted in four deaths. But these are mere footnotes to the spying on the Trump campaign, the attempted entrapment of Trump associates, and the continuation of this effort after the election. Imagine trying to indict the president-elect using the FBI and allies of the losing candidate, a member of the same Party as the Obama administration.
It has recently been revealed that the FISA warrants were all faulty, but the media played up the fact that the FBI’s work with the FISA court was pathetically bad, and that is their good news. They take that to mean that Trump wasn’t targeted politically. I think that’s a stretch of logic, but regardless, it was gross negligence and the very investigation of an opposing candidate should have raised big red alarm bells. The fact that these spying warrants continued to be requested and approved even after Trump was inaugurated is definitely criminal conduct in my opinion, given that there was no collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia, which was the reason given for the investigation in the first place.
This terrible article tries to denigrate our country by quoting Europeans who are at-odds with many aspects of the Trump administration, from the Iran nuclear deal to the Paris accords to the response to the Coronavirus to our trade imbalance to our dealings with Russia and China. Europe wants American to be led by an Obama-like leader who will continue the same policies that are weakening our country to the detriment of the EU, our adversaries, and the rest of the world.
The premise of this article is just wrong. Our economy has been disrupted, we are on lockdown, so naturally we are working through the crisis as best we can. When we come out of lockdown, things will slowly return to normal. I don’t see why it is surprising that with the disruption we wouldn’t have people looking for help or losing their job or sick patients being treated at hospitals. Our lockdown prevented unnecessary deaths due to lack of ventilators, for example, and our piecemeal approach to the crisis and allowing states to handle their own responses is a strength of our system. We can have 50 different approaches and learn 50 lessons from that experience.
So our Coronavirus response does not show American weakness, and it certainly has nothing to do with the concept of exceptionalism, which is unaffected by a plague on our society.
The statistics quoted in the article try to make it sound like we are doing a bad job because we’ve had so many cases and deaths. But we live in a free society and people have rights. China, which is surely under-counting and under-reporting their numbers, can effectively lock down a city of 10 million people under fear of being shot by the police. We can’t do that. And the European countries that have experienced a large outbreak are, per capita, getting hit much harder than the U.S.
But it isn’t surprising that with our travels, and with the lack of candor by the Chinese about the virus at the beginning, we would be hit hard with cases. This is a function of our wealth and world leadership, not an indication of weakness or lack of leadership. Only someone who was looking for an angle to attack this country would advance such an hypothesis, but that is pretty normal behavior for the New York Times and its media allies.
I love the fact that one European is quoted as saying that American prepared for the wrong war. We were fighting terrorism and not ready for a virus. Well, if it wasn’t for us investing in our military to fight our enemies, people in Europe would be speaking Russian right now and the rest of the world would be speaking Chinese. Evidently the Europeans are clueless that they are surviving and functioning under the American military umbrella.
And here is a direct quote: “The country that defeated fascism in Europe 75 years ago and defended democracy on the Continent in the decades that followed is doing a worse job of protecting its own citizens than many autocracies and democracies.”
According to NY Gov. Andrew Cuomo, not one New Yorker has lost their life to the Coronavirus because they couldn’t get needed medical care. Not one. By that measure, we’ve done a great job. (See https://www.nationalreview.com/news/as-new-york-posts-highest-one-day-death-toll-cuomo-says-no-victim-died-because-we-couldnt-provide-care/)
Allen Nitschelm is publisher of PublicEditorMA.com. He critiques the Boston Globe, mostly focusing on the bias in their news reporting. News articles are graded for bias, and the website has a listing of the average bias ratings for all reporters reviewed. See our website for more information and the four categories of articles we publish.
NOTE: We have been very active on our Facebook page for Public Editor Press. The page is getting lots of hits and comments, which have been very helpful. I urge readers to go there if you wish to participate or read reactions from others. You will need to “login” to Facebook to post your own comments but you can probably read them without a Facebook account. Here is the direct link to this article’s Facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/390560688135747/posts/833265907198554
To reach our Facebook site in general: https://www.facebook.com/publiceditorpress/
*Requires minimim of 5 Ratings to be displayed
Grading articles for bias is subjective. We hope that with widespread participation, we can give the reporters and editors at the Boston Globe valuable feedback on their professional work. Here are our suggestions for grading news articles for bias. (We do not rate editorial opinion columns for bias. But we do analyze the Boston Globe for overall editorial balance.)
Consider whether the article is completely free of bias (a grade of 10 or A), has been mostly free of bias (8 or 9, A- or B+), has been biased but not terribly or where the bias did not hurt the integrity of the underlying information (7 or 6, B or B-).
If the article was fairly biased overall, but subtle; or where the bias was particularly prominent but isolated to a single section, give the article a 5 or 4 (C+ or C). If the article was very biased but perhaps not intentionally so, perhaps a C- (3) would be deserved.
If the article was extremely prejudiced with major misstatements of fact, intentionally misleading, or ignored well known facts to advance a false narrative, give the article a D or F (2 or 1).
Reviewers must subscribe to Public Editor and agree to our terms of service to participate. Subscriptions are currently free. We recommend that all readers subscribe to the Boston Globe or the newspaper of their choice to support journalism, and to send the Boston Globe your feedback directly. Thank you for participating in Public Editor’s bias rating project!