Earlier today, Politico's Glenn Thrush beclowned himself with this piece of leftist hackery that couldn't be more contextually challenged. Thrush says money is the reason Walker won his recall challenge in Wisconsin last night and that the dastardly Citizens United Supreme Court decision is to blame:
Walker, exploiting a loophole that allowed him to hoard cash months ago, out-raised Barrett, a pathetic fundraiser who turned out to the political equivalent of the Milwaukee Bucks, by a TEN-TO-ONE margin, $30 million to $4 million. This was the first purely Citizens United Election -- and in that regard it should send a chill through Chicago and everywhere else Democrats are counting their pennies or begging Jeffrey Katzenberg to please, please, please save us.
What Thrush chooses to exclude in his analysis is the fact that unions poured another $21 million into the race on behalf of Democrats. So with those numbers added, it looks as though the money game was pretty even between the two parties. Walker might have had a slight edge, but as my colleague Ben Shapiro points out, Walker didn't have the built-in advantage of a ground game the unions enjoy (with taxpayer dollars fed to them through union dues from public workers).
Why would Thrush intentionally exclude such an important piece of journalistic context?
Well, for the same reason Politico's Donovan Slack excludes the most important journalistic context in her own piece of hackery that blames Citizens United for Obama shattering the record for most presidential time spent at fundraisers:
Including this week’s trip to California, he will have spent eight of 24 weekdays during the past month – that’s a third of them - on the road and collecting cash.
His event Thursday morning will mark his 153rd fundraiser since announcing his reelection bid last year. That’s nearly double the number that his predecessor George W. Bush had attended by this point in his reelection campaign, according to CBS’s Mark Knoller, who put 43’s early June number at 79. ...
Obama, like all federal candidates, is basically limited to taking in $35,800 per donor -- $5,000 for a campaign committee and $30,800 for the national party. But since Citizens United in 2010, outside groups - that are not subject to the limits -- have been allowed to spend unlimited amounts on political campaigns.
First off, Slack is simply making excuses for Obama's jet-setting with the 1% as the economy burns, and laughably attempts to portray poor Obama as some kind of victim, which is in and of itself pathetic.
In order to pull this off, though, what Slack chooses not to tell her readers is that there are pro-Obama super PACs just like there are pro-Romney super PACs, so the playing field with Citizens United is a perfectly level one. Moreover, it was Barack Obama in 2008 who exploded the money game by breaking his word to accept federal campaign matching funds (something the media, including Politico, never made him pay for).
By the time the 2008 race was over, Obama and the DNC had raised $830 million compared to McCain's paltry $500 million.
And as a watcher of Politico, I can tell you that no one there was ever wringing their hands over all that money being poured into politics when it was headed for Obama's fat coffers.
Something else Slack covers up is that Obama has to spend more time fundraising because he's having trouble raising the same amount of money he did last time, which has absolutely nothing to do with Citizens United and everything to do with the fact that he's a lousy president.
The bottom line here is that Thrush, Slack, Politico, and the whole of the MSM hate Citizens Untied for a couple of reasons. First off, it won't allow Obama the grotesque money advantage he enjoyed in 2008, which hurts his reelection chances -- something unthinkable to this crowd. Secondly, Citizens United has created the rise of the super PACs, which means that corporations other than media corporations and unions can now compete with the MSM to get a political message out.
The corrupt media hates that because the MSM believes it should be the only corporate-backed partisan machine legally allowed to use unlimited funds to get candidates elected.
As you can see by the two stories published at Politico today and those catalogued on the sidebar, Politico is getting more desperate by the day. Today's lies of omission are well beyond bias and edging into the arena of outright dishonesty.
And it's only June.
Follow John Nolte on Twitter @NolteNC