Wednesday, March 25, 2009
The Media - the New York Times
What is it with the New York Times?
Everything they report on has either a direct or slightly veiled dig at someone who doesn't fit in their liberal world...
Everything they report on has either a direct or slightly veiled dig at someone who doesn't fit in their liberal world...
William McGurn editorializes in the Wall Street Journal:
"'[I]n a departure from her predecessor,' gushed the Times, 'Mrs. Obama has also begun promoting bills that support her husband's policy priorities.' It repeated the point later in the piece.
Only one problem: It's not true. To mention just two, Mrs. Bush took a lead role in the reauthorization fights for No Child Left Behind and the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief. Her advocacy included holding coffees in the residence with key legislators, working with Cabinet members, and promoting these policies in high-profile speeches in places from Africa to the National Press Club. It's just flat-out wrong to suggest otherwise, and the Times owes Mrs. Bush an apology.
Alas, as bad as the slights are, the compliments can be worse. In another recent article on Mrs. Obama, the Associated Press did include a paragraph about Mrs. Bush's work on Burma, Africa and so on. That paragraph was introduced by this sentence: 'Even Laura Bush, widely viewed as a traditional first lady, broadened the role.'
Even Laura Bush. In that gratuitous 'even,' the curtain is pulled back on the small-mindedness of an entire class.
Michelle Obama is an accomplished professional and the loving mother of two beautiful girls. In the coming years, she will make her own contributions to a more hopeful America. As she does, is it too much to ask our national press corps to find a way to give Mrs. Obama full credit for these achievements without denying Mrs. Bush the credit she deserves for hers?"
