About the love-fest for Obama Williams writes
". . . it carries an implicit presumption of inferiority. Every American president must be held to the highest standard. No president of any color should be given a free pass for screw-ups, lies or failure to keep a promise . . . The importance of a proud, adversarial press speaking truth about a powerful politician and offering impartial accounts of his actions was frequently and embarrassingly lost. When Mr. Obama's opponents, such as the Clintons, challenged his lack of experience, or pointed out that he was not in the U.S. Senate when he expressed early opposition to the war in
Iraq, they were depicted as petty."
The press was embarrassingly invested in electing Obama and their coverage was emotionally based. They were not obsessed with investigating everything about the President as they were with President Bush. There were "hit jobs" at every turn, not just during the campaign, but during his entire presidency. It would be juevenile to say that there was nothing negative about Mr. Obama therefore they could not report on it. They were partisan and promoted the idea that Obama was the answer to everything wrong with America.
Will they begin reporting when Obama is unable to "put a chicken in every pot?" Or will they continue the cover-up?
No comments:
Post a Comment