Friday, Oct. 23, 2009, was a glorious day. On that day it was reported that the Obama administration had failed in a significant effort in the area of the autocratic tactics it has employed since Barack Obama took office, and far more increasingly in recent weeks.

I am speaking of the administration's attempt to maneuver establishment news organizations into segregating the Fox News network from the press corps. On Thursday of last week, the administration planned to allow members of the White House press pool to conduct interviews with "pay czar" Kenneth Feinberg. The pool is a group of five rotating network news organizations that is ostensibly representative of the press at large, and traditionally has shared the expense and function of covering the president.

The White House's intention was that all members of the White House press pool would be allowed to participate in the interviews with Feinberg – all, that is, except for Fox News.

As the reader may be aware, the Obama administration has been waging what can only be considered a one-sided (albeit vigorous) war of words against Fox. On Oct. 18, White House senior adviser David Axelrod said (on ABC News' "This Week" program) that Fox News is not a real news organization, and that other news networks ought not treat it as such. A broad hint, to be sure, if not a threat; on the same day, White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel made similar remarks during his appearance on CNN's "State of the Union" news show.

But, despite the establishment press' heretofore slavish devotion to Obama, the tactic backfired. The bureau chiefs of the pool networks asserted that none of their reporters would participate (in the interviews with Feinberg) unless Fox News was allowed to do so.

Discover the truth about the intimidation tactics used by today's White House in Whistleblower magazine's "MOB RULE: Under Obama, Chicago-style bullying and intimidation go nationwide"

And the administration gave in.

But it wasn't a glorious day because the establishment press "stuck up" for Fox. It wasn't a glorious day because the administration "lost," either.

It was a glorious day because it revealed the lack of mettle the administration has; it revealed the extent of their paternalism and arrogance where the establishment press is concerned; and gave the latter pause that is tantamount to a loss of political currency for Obama.

Now, there wasn't a great tumult surrounding this episode, and one should not have been expected. The bulk of the Washington press corps and prominent news agencies aren't going to switch allegiances; the White House will keep right on bashing Fox, and MSNBC's Keith Olbermann will continue to maintain his lip-lock on Obama's posterior for the foreseeable future. But some important boundaries were established through this event, and its significance should not be underestimated. The comportment of establishment news agencies where this White House is concerned – at least, behind the scenes – will definitely be more circumspect from now on.

So, why did the White House press pool stand by Fox in this case? Plainly put: They reasoned that if a competitor news organization could be treated thus, that there was nothing whatsoever to prevent an administration from doing so where any of them were concerned. Evidently, none of them had researched this president to the extent that many of my readers had – before he was even elected. Not to downplay my readers' cognitive resources, but that is a sad statement concerning the competence of those news bureau chiefs.

(Column continues below)

As I have affirmed previously, the apparent confidence on the part of far-lefters that each and every one of them, from door-to-door canvassers to those who hold high office, are going to be among the unassailable elite in the New Order is positively mind-boggling. Many of us now take it as a given that Obama has been a dedicated Marxist for all of his adult life, and that it is his intention to insinuate as much government into American institutions, and the lives of Americans, as possible.

We also know – from historical evidence – that such people hold no allegiance to anyone, even those who have proven valuable to them during their ascendancy. In fact, as regards the left, there is almost an uncanny tendency for successful leaders to throw their loyal compatriots under the bus with all due speed when they're done with them.

In this case, that would most assuredly include the establishment press. There is no question that Obama could not have been elected without them; further, that his capricious rhetoric and the duplicity of his machinations could not be filtered for mass public consumption without them. As such, there is no reason not to surmise that Obama – or whoever comes behind him – will deftly wrest autonomy from these agencies at the appropriate time.

Obviously, the examples of Leon Trotsky and Che Guevara have been lost on most major network news bureau chiefs. But don't despair: Their sense of self-preservation evidenced itself last week. Between this factor, the timely advent of the alternative press, the manic ambition of this administration, and you and I, there is definitely hope for us yet.