Could the Lure of a Pulitzer Trump Obama's Nobel?

Russ Vaughn
There is growing speculation among conservatives that many Democrats may be looking to distance themselves from their once infallible leader. It appears that even some of Obama's former true believers are finding in this ObamaCare boondoggle that that there is less truth than they originally were led to believe when it comes to this prevaricating president. While I definitely agree that there is growing discontent within the liberal ranks, I believe there's another threat coming for Obama that may be even more devastating than being deserted by his fellow Democrats and the voters who put him in office.

Remember, this unknown, inexperienced, Chicago politician only survived the primary against Hillary Clinton and the subsequent general election because the supposed watchdog media refused to do their jobs and investigate a résumé containing so many black holes and lack of substantiation that it would never have made it through the routine vetting required in the usual corporate hiring process. What America didn't know about young Barack far outweighed what we did know but the liberal media was far more consumed by the liberal dream of a Black president than they were by the possibility that he might not be qualified for the job. They were so obsessed with their politically correct vision that they even turned against their previous liberal love interest, Hillary Clinton. Through four years of Obama's first term and through re-election, the media stubbornly refused to do their jobs and find out for their viewers and readers just who this man really is.

But what if that should change? As the Obama White House comes under more frequent and pointed criticism for its arrogant treatment of the media and more revelations of continuing, systemic dishonesty come to light, just how long will it be before some enterprising editor wakes up to the opportunity that his very own equivalent of the Pentagon Papers or Deep Throat/Watergate could be staring him right in the face? All he need do is assign an investigative team to find out just how extensive the dishonesty surrounding this, up until now, unexamined president really is and how deep into his past it goes. If you review the past winners of The Pulitzer Prize for Investigative Reporting, you will discover that, unlike other categories such as international reporting, many of the awards have gone to smaller newspapers, not just the dominant liberal publications like the NYT, WaPo, the Chicago Trib and LA Times. Yes, the big papers still dominate the category but lesser lights also have a chance to grab this gold ring of journalism and sometimes succeed. And every editor and reporter out there knows that once bestowed, Pulitzer Prize Winner is a lifetime honorific that confers professional esteem and career benefits right up until it features prominently in your celebrity obituary, a tempting lure for sure.

Do you not suppose that thought already may be percolating in the minds of some of those who decide the course of those smaller, but still significant, publications? And can you not imagine that the grating, high-handed manner in which the White House is attempting to control all media coverage isn't fueling at least a few such mutinous thoughts? Journalists are supposedly ingrained with an eagerness to expose the unseemly, especially if they are the first in their field to do so, to scoop the story. It can't have been easy for some of the less liberal among both reporters and editors to have been forced to tamp down their professional curiosity for five years or more so as to protect America's first black president, especially in less politically doctrinaire news organizations scattered about flyover country.

So while Obama's downfall might originate there in the hinterlands he so disdains, it is exponentially more dangerous for Barack Obama that there may be a publisher and editor in New York, Washington, Chicago, or Los Angeles, at one of the titan organizations with the requisite resources, who's tiring of the growing arrogance of the administration in its media dealings. It is not completely far-fetched to consider that as the outright dishonesty and stonewalling of this supposedly most transparent of administrations continues and expands, some publishing mogul may be weighing the prestige awaiting his newspaper should it be the first to expose the truth of Barack Obama's too-good-to-be-true political ascent. And in an age of declining readers and ad revenues, an ongoing series of blockbuster revelations about the greatest fraud ever perpetrated might be a way to change that trend.

As for the investigators themselves, I'll wager there are already some disenchanted reporters who are beginning to envision themselves as future Woodwards and Bernsteins, but on an even grander scale. And unlike those two reporters of an earlier era, any investigators of Obama's mysterious past would have far more avenues of enquiry and who knows how many potential Deep Throats who, upon learning that the media is finally interested in listening to them, might reveal all sorts of information about Obama's past that could disprove the official version and explain why there are so many blank areas in Obama's résumé. And why he should never have been president. It will be interesting to see if the lure of a Pulitzer can trump a Nobel.

There is growing speculation among conservatives that many Democrats may be looking to distance themselves from their once infallible leader. It appears that even some of Obama's former true believers are finding in this ObamaCare boondoggle that that there is less truth than they originally were led to believe when it comes to this prevaricating president. While I definitely agree that there is growing discontent within the liberal ranks, I believe there's another threat coming for Obama that may be even more devastating than being deserted by his fellow Democrats and the voters who put him in office.

Remember, this unknown, inexperienced, Chicago politician only survived the primary against Hillary Clinton and the subsequent general election because the supposed watchdog media refused to do their jobs and investigate a résumé containing so many black holes and lack of substantiation that it would never have made it through the routine vetting required in the usual corporate hiring process. What America didn't know about young Barack far outweighed what we did know but the liberal media was far more consumed by the liberal dream of a Black president than they were by the possibility that he might not be qualified for the job. They were so obsessed with their politically correct vision that they even turned against their previous liberal love interest, Hillary Clinton. Through four years of Obama's first term and through re-election, the media stubbornly refused to do their jobs and find out for their viewers and readers just who this man really is.

But what if that should change? As the Obama White House comes under more frequent and pointed criticism for its arrogant treatment of the media and more revelations of continuing, systemic dishonesty come to light, just how long will it be before some enterprising editor wakes up to the opportunity that his very own equivalent of the Pentagon Papers or Deep Throat/Watergate could be staring him right in the face? All he need do is assign an investigative team to find out just how extensive the dishonesty surrounding this, up until now, unexamined president really is and how deep into his past it goes. If you review the past winners of The Pulitzer Prize for Investigative Reporting, you will discover that, unlike other categories such as international reporting, many of the awards have gone to smaller newspapers, not just the dominant liberal publications like the NYT, WaPo, the Chicago Trib and LA Times. Yes, the big papers still dominate the category but lesser lights also have a chance to grab this gold ring of journalism and sometimes succeed. And every editor and reporter out there knows that once bestowed, Pulitzer Prize Winner is a lifetime honorific that confers professional esteem and career benefits right up until it features prominently in your celebrity obituary, a tempting lure for sure.

Do you not suppose that thought already may be percolating in the minds of some of those who decide the course of those smaller, but still significant, publications? And can you not imagine that the grating, high-handed manner in which the White House is attempting to control all media coverage isn't fueling at least a few such mutinous thoughts? Journalists are supposedly ingrained with an eagerness to expose the unseemly, especially if they are the first in their field to do so, to scoop the story. It can't have been easy for some of the less liberal among both reporters and editors to have been forced to tamp down their professional curiosity for five years or more so as to protect America's first black president, especially in less politically doctrinaire news organizations scattered about flyover country.

So while Obama's downfall might originate there in the hinterlands he so disdains, it is exponentially more dangerous for Barack Obama that there may be a publisher and editor in New York, Washington, Chicago, or Los Angeles, at one of the titan organizations with the requisite resources, who's tiring of the growing arrogance of the administration in its media dealings. It is not completely far-fetched to consider that as the outright dishonesty and stonewalling of this supposedly most transparent of administrations continues and expands, some publishing mogul may be weighing the prestige awaiting his newspaper should it be the first to expose the truth of Barack Obama's too-good-to-be-true political ascent. And in an age of declining readers and ad revenues, an ongoing series of blockbuster revelations about the greatest fraud ever perpetrated might be a way to change that trend.

As for the investigators themselves, I'll wager there are already some disenchanted reporters who are beginning to envision themselves as future Woodwards and Bernsteins, but on an even grander scale. And unlike those two reporters of an earlier era, any investigators of Obama's mysterious past would have far more avenues of enquiry and who knows how many potential Deep Throats who, upon learning that the media is finally interested in listening to them, might reveal all sorts of information about Obama's past that could disprove the official version and explain why there are so many blank areas in Obama's résumé. And why he should never have been president. It will be interesting to see if the lure of a Pulitzer can trump a Nobel.