On the West Coast earlier this week to meet donors from two top Democratic super PACs, he specifically excluded the press. According to Politico, "the reporters and photographers traveling with the president on Air Force One and in his motorcade were left on the gravel path not even within sight of former Costco CEO Jim Sinegal's house in the Seattle suburbs where Obama sat for a Senate Majority PAC fundraiser with a $25,000 entrance fee."
The same thing happened the next morning, when he didn't even tell his media cheerleaders what floor of the downtown San Francisco Four Seasons hotel he was on while panhandling with major donors for the House Majority PAC.
Christi Parsons, president of the White House Correspondents' Association, emitted a toothless protest, saying: "We think these fundraisers ought to be open to at least some scrutiny, because the president's participation in them is fundamentally public in nature. Denying access to him in that setting undermines the public's ability to independently monitor and see what its government is doing." You think?
Then why do you all continue to cover for this man and his policies? Why do you never hold him accountable for his ongoing whopper that he is running the "most transparent administration in history"?
The reason is that you are his ideological soul mates, and that trumps all else, including your sacred, selectively enforced motto, "The public has a right to know."
Media dishonor aside, Obama, as I said, does have strong reasons for wanting to fly under the radar when fundraising. As tone-deaf, insensitive and self-absorbed as he is, he is surely at least marginally aware that many Americans find his endless taxpayer-subsidized, partisan fundraising offensive when it proceeds apace amid multitudinous world crises and domestic scandals.
There's also the matter of his partisan tone, which he doubtlessly ratchets up to new levels of stridency when among fellow travelers in the top 1 percent as they join in condemning wealthy capitalists while exempting themselves -- because they care, as evidenced by their liberalism.
Losing Jobs Over Ex-Im’s Expiration? Don’t Believe ItLosing Jobs Over Ex-Im’s Expiration? Don’t Believe It | Ed Feulner