by Ian Mosley

The likelihood that there will ever be a full and complete investigation into all the financial and other irregularities in the Obama campaign during the 2008 election is pretty much non-existent. But that doesn’t mean that the truth won’t come out, thanks to the Internet.

WorldNetDaily reports: “President Obama’s presidential campaign focused on making the news media cover certain issues while rarely communicating anything to the press unless it was controlled, White House Communications Director Anita Dunn disclosed to the Dominican government at a videotaped conference. ‘Very rarely did we communicate through the press anything that we didn’t absolutely control,’ said Dunn.”

So much for liberal claims about wanting fair election coverage by the media. With these people, in the final analysis it’s all about control. Liberals want to tell you what to do and tell you what to think and believe. It’s that simple.

WorldNetDaily goes on. “‘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,’ said Dunn, referring to Plouffe, who was Obama’s chief campaign manager. ‘We just put that out there and made 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,’ Dunn said.”

So the liberals figured out a way to keep getting Obama on the news without all those annoying questions from reporters. Well, that takes care of what little scrutiny there might have been from the friendly liberal media.

The article notes ” ‘Whether it was a David Plouffe video or an Obama speech, a huge part of our press strategy was focused on making the media cover what Obama was actually saying as opposed to why the campaign was saying it, what the tactic was. … Making the press cover what we were saying.’ ”

And the liberal media, of course, went along with it. It takes two to tango, and one of the most obvious aspects of the 2008 campaign from early on was that the media had completely abdicated their responsibility to examine political claims and political candidates objectively, and to report fairly and accurately. They were Obama cultists from start, and The One could do no wrong, period, end of story. Contrast this with the vicious sliming and demonizing of Sarah Palin, who had better job experience and who -despite the hype- was smarter than Obama. I didn’t hear Palin say that there were “57 states” or that there were dead people in the audience like Obama did.

Bush and Cheney never tried to manipulate the media like that. They simply ignored the creeps. But can you imagine that the papers and TV would ever let Republicans get away with anything like what Anita Dunn describes the Democrats as doing?