Bias? What Bias?

on Monday, December 8, 2008

A good catch by Warner Todd Huston who points out yet another shamefully pathetic double standard creeping up from the foul depths of the Obama-worshipping media:

[In early 2001] as Bush tried to warn the nation, the media jumped all over him for "talking down the economy." Yet, as we watch the reporting of Obama's current down talking of the economy, the media has said nothing similar to the condemnation reigned upon Bush...

On CNN, Lou Waters needled Bush spokesman Ari Fleischer on January 12, 2001 about the "politicalization " of the economy. "President Clinton, sort of, answered that as well today. He's talking up the economy. There are economists who say you guys are talking down the economy. What's happening here in this transition period, the whole, sort of, politicalization [of the economy]...," Waters said.

On March 19, 2001, The New York Times scolded Bush that presidents were supposed to be "cheerleaders for the nation's economy."

[On March 26, 2001, Alter unleashed his Newsweek piece headlined "Thanks Ever So Much, President Poor-Mouth."]

Yet, has anyone seen any similar scolding of the new "cheerleader" in chief, Obama? Has anyone seen an Alter sternly scolding Obama for "poor-mouthing" the economy? Has there been any hectoring from CNN over Obama's grave warnings? Where is The New York Times beating up that downcast Obama?

In fact, every single report I have seen about Obama's talk on the economy has been matter of fact. Even sometimes giving him cover for changing his campaign rhetoric about the economy by asserting his acknowledgment that he has changed his tune.

The New York Times went so far as to assess Obama's mood as optimistic, despite his claims of an further economic downslide. "Despite the bleak economic picture awaiting him, Mr. Obama sought to project an air of determined optimism," the Times published on December 7.

For its coverage, the Washington Post, assures us all that Obama is putting things in "perspective" for us as he prepares to take office.
I was thinking this very same thing on Suunday after catching Tom Brokaw's interview with Obama on Meet the Press this past weekend in which Obama claimed that the economy "is going to get worse".

I'm confused. You see, from what I recall, during the election our media outlets assured us that Obama was the redeemer of all things dreadful. The cure for all of America's woes. Yea, the veritable messiah himself come down in mortal form to heal the earth and all the underlying troubles within...

Yet now we have Obama telling us it's going to get worse? And all while forming a committee to lower American's expectations of what the rookie will actually accomplish as president?

Why is the media setting up a cushion for Obama before he even takes office? Are they are already expecting him to fail? If so, (which I assume is the case), then why in the world are so many anchors calling for an amendment to the Constitution allowing Obama to take office early so he can get us into a deeper mess sooner?

0 comments: