…or is it just a lover’s spat?
…a large element of the Obama-press rift is attributable to disappointment and frustration. The media is not simply covering Obama’s sinking ship of state, they are panicking about it.
But there are other factors at work. For starters, Obama isn’t very nice to the media. It may sound petty, but his obvious and frequent contempt for what they do must be irksome to reporters who fancy themselves to be indispensable elements in the Obama revolution. He spits his disdain for the “24-hour news cycle.” The press is told to buzz off — there is no news to be had on his Martha’s Vineyard vacation (before the eye-popping decision to name a special prosecutor to go after CIA operatives). And for all the promises to be “transparent,” this White House, and Robert Gibbs specifically, seems to be one of the least forthcoming in recent memory.
In short, the Obama team has shown the media little respect — and the press corps has begun to bristle at the high-handed treatment.
I’ll take it seriously when I start seeing some serious questions from the WH press corps (you know, on things like this, or this (who needs Chavez when we have the US State Department?)), and actually doing analysis of the legislation and reporting on the issues, instead of the horse race. Like the Obama White House itself, they too remain in campaign mode.
I like the “battered spouse” analogy — if only they’re nice enough, he will love them back. It’s really no different that Obama and Old Media treat thugs like Chavez, is it?
It’s like feminists and Clinton. Bill Clinton treated women like disposable napkins, yet his feminist supporters gave him pass after pass.
Bill Clinton treated women like disposable napkins…
Actually, more like (literally) toilet paper.
Ms. Harris;
Don’t forget Ted Kennedy.
Don’t forget Ted Kennedy.
Who treated women like…floatation devices?
I wish I could.