In a mainstream media with a mad crush on the messiah in the White House, none can come close to matching the adoration of The New York Times.
Reporting on the president’s Tuesday evening address in today’s paper, America’s newspaper of wretched gushed, “Americans saw not the fiery and inspirational speaker who riveted the nation in his address to Congress last month, or the conversational president who warmly engaged Americans in talk shows across the country, or even the jaunty, jokey president who showed up on Jay Leno,” but Barack the “professor in chief, offering familiar arguments in long paragraphs” (emphasis added to highlight the worshipful tone).
Said feeble attempt at journalism is in the service of the administration’s efforts to sell its great leap toward socialism to the American people, as well as to counter the observation that when he’s separated from his teleprompter, the president can barely get out a coherent thought.
The story reported the president’s observation that “we’re beginning to see signs of progress” toward “a renewed confidence that a better day will come.” Tell it to the Dow-Jones.
Try to imagine a Republican president making a claim so totally at odds with reality and not being challenged by The Times.
In fact, the public does not see a silver — or even a cubic zirconium — lining in the president’s stimulus spending.
In a recent Wall Street Journal/NBC poll, nearly 60% said Obama’s stimulus package would make only a marginal difference in the next two to four years.
A plurality (46% to 41%) now oppose the president’s $3.6 trillion budget, which the Congressional Budget Office says will generate $9.3 billion in deficits over the next decade. None of which the average reader would have gotten from the Oh-isn’t-he-wonderful story in today’s Times.
Overall, The New York Times’ relationship with Barack Obama is similar to a famous intern’s connection to former President Clinton — minus the stained dress.