Save the political jargon: Facts please!

A recent online article in The Trumpet news magazine caught my irritated attention. The article titled President Obama's Disagreement with Winston Churchill 'claims', citing history and Winston Churchill's philosophy, that President Obama is making a huge mistake by underestimating Germany and not paying attention to what a powerful and influential Germany represents - as suggested by Churchill during World War II.
Every journalist or reporter that covers a story has a right to their opinion. Leaking it over into a story without stating all the facts is not only bad journalism, but it is also irresponsible. For most people, the 'mainstream media' is their only source for news. People don't have the time to dig up facts and old international affairs to crosscheck stories and facts claimed in the media bias. Which is why a good reporter will give sufficient background information and even share facts that might seem to hurt his or her own position on the issue at hand.
Winston Churchill has been raised on a pedestal in America. Agreed that he was a tremendous leader with a vast influential potential and stood for the premises of democracy, capitalism, and 'righteousness' as comprehended by most Americans. But he also had his share of questionable episodes that are often overlooked by the Western media.
During his time served in the British forces during India's independence period, Mr.Churchill had been less than supportive of India's independence movement. Not only did he openly state his discontentment with the idea of an independent India, he also conveyed his dismay with Gandhi's nonviolent movement. He went far enough to state that Gandhi's death was a necessity and that him going on a hunger strike and surviving triumphantly was a failure of Britain's national interest. There are historians that claim that Churchill's wartime government during the Bengal 1943 famine should bear significant blame for the mortality of 3 million people.
Leaders have to thrive midst controversies. Given. But to highlight the positives while ignoring questionable judgement and decisions is a disservice to the masses.
It is considered taboo for leaders of the West to sway against vetted leadership. It is time to take a detour from acceptable and expected leadership and pave way for one that is dynamic, fair and encompassing. Reporters have to promote the idea of global leadership and newfound principles that don't rely on stale, stereotypical schools of thought. Churchill with India, Nixon on Iran Contra Affairs, Roosevelt and his socialist policies, even Jefferson and slavery have all been branded as great leadership, yet share substantial controversial politics. Perhaps Obama's stance on strong German leadership has an agenda bigger than what was needed to be fetched 60 years ago. He doesn't have to equivocate with political jargon and blindly follow acceptable stances given today's world affairs. A good leader's decisions don't need unwarranted following. They can be backed up with unfaltering pragmatism and the truth.

Find the complete Trumpet article here: http://www.thetrumpet.com/?q=8378.7073.0.0