"Abuse of Candor" by Arnie Sherr

The First Amendment to the United States Constitution is the part of the United States Bill of Rights that expressly prohibits the United States Congress from making laws "respecting an establishment of religion" or that prohibit the free exercise of religion, infringe the freedom of speech, infringe the freedom of the press, limit the right to peaceably assemble, or limit the right to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

Freedom of the press consists of constitutional or statutory protections pertaining to the media and published materials.

With respect to governmental information, any government distinguishes which materials are public or protected from disclosure to the public based on classification of information as sensitive, classified or secret and being otherwise protected from disclosure due to relevance of the information to protecting the national interest.

I hope you’ve taken a moment to read the above “First Amendment” definition. Pertaining to the freedoms listed, I am only concerned herein with “Freedom of the Press.”

When we speak of “Freedom of the Press” are we giving license to the press to alarm their listeners? Is it moral or of sound judgment to present information that is destructive not only to the secure and safe feelings, such as they are, that most Americans have come to cautiously embrace since 9/11 and also to openly ask questions, the answers of which take a strong position against this new President’s overwhelming and complicated agenda? In spite of “Freedom of the Press,” is it possible that the media has crossed the line? Let me give you a prime example; one of many that John King fostered while interviewing former Vice President Dick Cheney.

John King mentioned that President Obama has ordered that all torture initiatives be stopped, that <?xml:namespace prefix = st1 />Guantanamo be closed, that detainees be tried out of the Military system; better yet, below is the excerpt from the interview…   

KING: You made clear in an interview with the Politico when you left office that you were a little worried that President Obama might not be up to this challenge of fighting terrorism. I want to read you from that interview. You said you think there’s a high probability of such an attempt, meaning a major attack on the United States like 9/11. And you said, whether or not they can pull it off depends whether or not we keep in place policies that have allowed us to defeat all further attempts since 9/11 to launch mass casualty attacks against the United States.” Well, since taking office, President Obama has done these things to change the policies you helped put in place. He has announced he will close the Guantanamo Bay detention facility. He has announced he will close CIA black sites around the world, where they interrogate terror suspects. Says he will make CIA interrogators abide by the Army Field Manual, defined waterboarding as torture and ban it, suspend trials for terrorists by military commission, and now eliminate the label of enemy combatants.

I’d like to just simply ask you, yes or no, by taking those steps; do you believe the president of the United States has made Americans less safe?

CHENEY: I do. I think those programs were absolutely essential to the success we enjoyed of being able to collect the intelligence that let us defeat all further attempts to launch attacks against the United States since 9/11. I think that’s a great success story. It was done legally. It was done in accordance with our constitutional practices and principles.

President Obama campaigned against it all across the country. And now he is making some choices that, in my mind, will, in fact, raise the risk to the American people of another attack.

            After witnessing this entire interview, which by the way is filled with many instances of Anti-Obama rhetoric that was coerced by John King’s deliberate questions, I was taken back. Is this the kind of information that is defined as beneficial? Having anyone of experience or authority, answer such deliberately inflammatory and morally destructive questions is undeniably irresponsible. Moreover, I think the entire tone of the interview is “Abuse of Candor.” Legal does make it right!    

Yes, the First Amendment protects the media with “Freedom of the Press.” But what about patriotism; what about journalistic responsibility, and what about common sense? I state with confidence that most, if not every viewer of tonight’s on-air Cheney interview are more scared now than they were one hour ago, or perhaps since 9/11. Is this to job of the media; to inject fear into the lives of an economically struggling populous? I don’t think so! The entire interview is a horrific example of the worse kind of journalism and John King should be ashamed. You may access the entire transcript by clicking here KING/CHENEY INTERVIEW.

President Obama has been in office a mere 50 days, yet the media does all it can to tear down his agenda without offering viable alternatives. Oh yes, they do seat what they title as experts; they speak as if they have a direct line to the President’s staff of 31 world renown economists. Factually, they have little more than “opinions” based on, I don’t know what!

John King asked every question possible that offered Dick Cheney multiple opportunities to criticize President Obama’s actions as poor choices, failed agenda, and furthermore, dangerous. This kind of an interview is a deliberate attempt to injure the hopes and dreams of all Americans. Now is the time to get behind Obama, whether you voted for him or not. He is the President and whether you agree or not, his are the only solutions on the table. Isn’t it better to pray and hope he and his advisors are on the correct path than to fight him every step of the way? President Obama is the only game in town and not by accident. Don’t allow this kind of irresponsible reporting to douse your hopes and dreams.

Remember? “Yes we can, and we will!”