MSNBC and CNN have reached a new and unimaginable low.  They have decided that it is better to hear their spin on the White House Coronavirus Task Force briefings than to hear from the professionals involved.

The management of those two networks now believe that it is in the best public interest for we the people to NOT hear directly from the President and those medical professionals that he has appointed to the Task Force.  Each day, President Trump uses the White House briefing room to allow members of the Fourth Estate to ask any and all the questions they wish.  Initially, these briefings were carried by all the major cable networks in their entirety.

The problem for CNN and MSNBC was that Trump and his medical advisors – specifically Dr. Anthony Fauci, Dr. Deborah Birx and Surgeon General Jerome Adams — were saying things that did not support the networks pre-conceived anti-Trump narratives.

One of those narratives is that Trump does not listen to the medical professionals and that they are unhappy with his comments.  They even speculated that Trump was unhappy with Fauci and was considering firing him.  That baseless claim was made because Fauci did not attend one of the daily briefings.  That fact was used by the networks to weave an entire baseless speculative report.  It was – as Trump says – fake news.

Since Fauci and Birx are held in the highest esteem within the profession and among the general public, there is only one way that CNN and MSNBC – along with their elitist colleagues – can maintain the appearance of conflict and Trump’s alleged disregard for their advice — and that is to not allow the people to see and hear what is actually said at the White House briefings.

If you watch the entire White House briefings – as I have repeatedly advised the public to do – you would discover that the truth is the opposite of the anti-Trump media  narratives.  The networks pay lip service to listening to the scientists, but they prevent the public from seeing the expressions of agreement and cooperation evident in the actual briefings – and gaining important accurate information in the process.

It started a few days back, when the various talking heads on CNN and MSNBC suggested that full coverage of the White House briefings was not necessary.  They said the briefings were turning into Trump rallies.  Anyone watching the briefings would know that is a whole-cloth lie.

It is true that Trump can be a bit verbose and egocentric, but not only do all the participants generally agree, the others have ample time to give out extremely valuable information – the best information from the most knowledgeable professionals.

The propaganda attack on the White House briefings kicked into high gear with the Monday edition of “Morning Joe.”  Co-hosts Joe Scarborough and Mika Brzezinski engaged in an unhinged attack.  They said that the briefings were a waste of time – because they could summarize (read that mischaracterize) what was said in two minutes.

They said that the briefings were nothing but lies and counterproductive to addressing the Covid-19 virus.  The President just rambles and repeats himself for more than an hour.  (As opposed to the networks’ folks rambling and repeating themselves for 24 hours.)

Their characterization of the briefings, however, is a complete political fabrication.  But it is consistent with Brzezinski’s inadvertent admission.  She protested outside information by declaring that “It is our job (the media’s) to tell people what to think.”  That one phrase explains what happened with the Monday briefing.

While FOX News carried the entire briefing – which contained a LOT of new and important information (even some good news) – CNN and MSNBC cut the briefing short and went to regular programming – meaning bashing Trump and the administration.

The segue for MSNBC was interesting because it was handled by their tarnished star Brian Williams – who was booted from the main NBC anchor job after making up stories and presenting them as news.  After a prolonged period of absence, Williams was resurrected as a personality on NBC’s minor league subsidiary – MSNBC.  Rather than allowing the public to hear the rest of the briefing, Williams announced that he would explain the important highlights.  How he would do that is a mystery, since he was no longer watching the briefing.  Instead, MSNBC brought in their stable of parroting pundits to continue their old-news anti-Trump narratives based on false reporting.

CNN did the same.  Perpetual panelist Gloria Borger came close to a foot-stomping, panty-wetting outrage over what she declared to be Trump’s mistreatment of the members of the working press.  Borger’s tantrum should come as no surprise since she is a reliable member of the Anti-Trump Resistance Movement.

What CNN and MSNBC did was nothing less than censorship to salvage political propaganda.  What could be more abhorrent to a free press and an informed public than for the media to inhibit free speech. In my entire life in politics and public policy, I have never seen such an outrageous corruption of honest journalism.

I repeat the advice I have given in other commentaries.  To be informed by the President AND the top medical professionals, you should watch the White House briefings from beginning to end – pay special attention to the medical professionals — and then turn to the movie channel to avoid being grossly misinformed by so-called news networks.

So, there ‘tis.

The most common hashtag mantra regarding the Covid-19 outbreak is that “we are all in it together.”  But is that true?

Different people seem to have different opinions as to whether we have gone too far in shutting down America.  There are those who seem to believe that the self-imposed collapse of the American economy – and with it, one of the highest standards of living in the world – is worth it … necessary.  Others believe that we have overreached, and that this shutdown is as politically driven as it is medically necessary.

On the far left – represented by the current Democratic Party and its elitist media – are those who see the Covid-19 as an opportunity to move the nation further to the left.  They are promoting the idea that the national government in Washington must seize power – nationalize the private sector and take over the primary role of states and municipalities in handling public health issues.

Those folks want more than temporary help from Washington.  They want a dramatic increase in the power of the federal government – and by extension an elite ruling-class composed of authoritarian officials and an oppressive bureaucracy.  It is the very enemy of individual freedom that the founders feared most – an all-powerful central government.

Vermont’s socialist Senator Bernie Sanders has seized on the Covid-19 virus to resurrect his Medicare-for-all proposal that would wipe out every private healthcare plan in the nation.  House Democrats – led by Speaker Nancy Pelosi are attempting to pepper the relief and stimulus bills with provisions that would change the nature of our elections, change campaign finance laws and create mandatory unionization.

In addition to the political calls, there are others who seem to believe that no economic hardship is too great if it can save even a single life.  Their opinions are seen — and their voice heard — across the media – mostly in the more liberal publications and networks.

But if you examine them closely, you will discover that the very people calling for Draconian economic sacrifices are not among those making them.  They are largely untouched by the havoc they wreak.  All those politicians you see on television are still being paid – as are all those million-dollar-salary media personalities who interview them.  The reporters and columnists are also on the clock, as they say.

Government workers at the federal, state and local levels are all being paid even if they are not working – teachers, for example, and all those people who are not at those closed government offices.  Union officials and salaried corporate executives are not missing a paycheck.  Workers in the retail food industry are on the job.  Utility workers – phone, electricity and gas – are working.

Obviously, police, paramedics and medical workers must be on the payroll – and while their sacrifice is not economic, they are in danger more than most.

Some industries have cut back but have still maintained a level of personnel – such as the airlines, bus companies, and some retail establishments.  My local Home Depot is still open.

Folks who receive Social Security – like me – are still getting our checks every month.   Welfare assistance goes forth unabated.

My point is simple.  It is easy to support the policy of economic shutdown if your personal economy is not being shut down.  Cable news is filled with anecdotal human-interest stories of people fearing the impact of the Covid-19 on them or loved ones.  We see repeated pleas for more protective gear for our medical heroes – and they are heroes.

But we see very little human interest in the press for that family of four without a bank account and now without a paycheck.  Oh yeah … they speak of them statistically and in the abstract, but do not plumb the depts of the personal anxieties and despair.

Maybe if more people were being hit by the economic crisis, they would not be so sure that closing down the nation was the best idea.

So, there ‘tis.

Not long ago, former President Jimmy Carter said that 80 years old is too old to carry out the duties of President of the United States.  He should know since he was the President – and knows the duties – and he is now 94 years old – so he knows what really old age is like.  He is right.

Pondering Carter’s opinion – and realizing that I am just a couple of putts away from 80, myself – I have abandoned all ambitions and plans to run for President of the United States.  As onetime Illinois Senator Everett Dirksen responded when asked about plans to run for President despite his age – “That ship has long ago left the dock.”

The pollsters tell us that Former Vice President Biden has the edge with older voters. As an older voter, I am surprised.  All the folks with whom I communicate who are 80 or older talk about all the creeping limitations of body and mind – and that is even the most vigorous of them.  They tire easily.  They get forgetful and confused a bit.  They already have a host of medical issues that sap their vitality.

Even the most vigorous septuagenarians and octogenarians recognize that they are in the danger zone of life – that time when “anything can happen.”  We seniors are a day away from a catastrophic health event.  Though not catastrophic, we saw how a small heart attack took Senator Bernie Sanders off the campaign trail for a week or so.

Joe Biden and Sanders have both already surpassed the life expectancy of an average American male (76 years).  The fact that both have had serious health problems in the past puts them at even a higher risk.  The odds suggest that Biden and Sanders will have significant health issues sometime in the next four years.  You can bet on it.

If we just consider geriatrics, President Trump has the age advantage.  He is a kid compared to them.  At 74, he would complete a second term before he hit 80.  In fact, he would leave office after 8 years at the same age Biden or Sanders would be inaugurated for their first term – making them the oldest presidents every elected.

President Reagan was 78 when he completed two terms – and there were reports that he was already suffering from age-related health issues in his final months in office.

I know it is politically incorrect to question a person’s ability purely because of age, but as Biden, himself, often says, “Come on man, get real.”  The presidency is an extremely demanding job.  There are enormous pressures.  Long days and short nights.  It requires great stamina – not something found in very old people.

In brief appearances, Biden looks great – full of energy.  But he also has a lot of time off from the campaign trail.  He can afford to do that during a campaign, but not as President.

Biden is showing his age, as they say.  Many of his gaffes are common in older folks.  He forgets or confuses names and places.   He loses his train of thought in what some call a “senior moment.”

Sanders does not seem to mind showing his age.  That is not true of Biden – who uses makeup to cover up lines and “age spots” during television appearances.

I would never suggest that age be the ONLY criteria for determining a vote, but it should be taken into consideration. After all, President Franklin Roosevelt was elected to a fourth term when those close to him knew that he was terminally ill – and would not live out the first year much less the entire four-year term.

It is increasingly likely that Biden will be the Democratic nominee for President.  Most supporters will vote for him despite his age.  They should not, however, think that age and health will not be an important issue sooner than they might think.

So, there ‘tis.

Among the mainstay narratives of the Democratic Party is that money corrupts politics — and that the division between the rich and poor is a national crisis.  Those claims have always been a bit hyperbolic, but now they are downright hypocritical.  Thanks go to former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg for exposing it.

If, as expected, Bloomberg keeps his pledge to use hundreds of millions of dollars to elect former Vice President Joe Biden, Democrat House and Senate candidates and an untold number of Democrats to state and local office, he will be living proof that all that left-wing talk about money corrupting politics was empty political talking points.

By dangling dollars in front of the Democratic Party — like  carrion in front of vultures — Bloomberg exposes the whore-ish underbelly of left-wing politics.  Their governing principle is to do whatever is necessary to win.

While his socialist policies are as bad and crazy as can be, at least Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders has the courage of his misguided convictions.  He has stated that he does not want Bloomberg’s money and would not take it if he were the nominee – as unlikely as that may seem today.  And that goes for all those other billionaire fat cats.

Conversely, Biden, Democrat National Chairman Tom Perez and every other Democrat and progressive fundraising organization are on their knees kissing Bloomberg’s ring (one would hope) with hands outstretched.

In their lust of his wallet, the entire Democratic Party has tossed aside their longstanding objection to the influence of big money in politics.  They are reminiscent of what one-time southern Democrat senator said when asked how much he needed for his campaign.  He replied. “All I can get.”

Our ridiculous federal election laws prevent guys like Bloomberg from donating big bucks directly to federal campaigns – President, Senate and House.  But they can do two things – use their cadre of friends to bundle lots of $2700 donations.  But even better, they can set up what are known as “independent expenditure committees” and fund them with as much of their money as they like.  No limit.

This loophole enables a guy like Bloomberg to advertise nice things ABOUT a candidate as long has he does not talk TO or conspire WITH the candidate.  Only a Congress would come up with nutty laws like that.

Ever since they passed the federal election laws of the 1970s, I have been a constant critic.  It makes no sense to restrict what a candidate can accept in donations and still allow the creation of these loophole committees that pour billions of dollars into the process.  We should allow unlimited direct contributions, have larger contributions publicly reported and let we the people decide what we think about the contributors and the candidate taking the money.

Since campaign money is used to “get out the message,” I like to think that every candidate will have the resources to tell his or her story to the voters –and not be defeated by a LACK of money.  Money spent on campaigns is good for democracy – hell, it is essential.  Let the candidates take in the money and get rid of all these external committees over which the candidate has no control over the message.

On the final analysis, it is NOT the fact that Bloomberg is willing to spend so much money to support candidates – let him – but let all the candidates who do not have such a bank-roller compete by raising sufficient money.  Besides, all that money spent on campaigns is good for the economy.  Think of all the people and businesses they hire or retain.

So, I am not pointing at the money, but at the gross hypocrisy of the left-wing Democratic Party that talks against big contributions while eagerly soliciting them.

So, there ‘tis.