Back in the bad old days of the presidency of George W. Bush, America’s media could be counted on to hold our Commander-in-Chief accountable. For everything. The flooding of New Orleans and FEMA’s slow response was blamed on “W”. America’s foray into Iraq provided pundits with endless material with which to vilify Bush. When the rich accumulated wealth faster than the poor — a phenomena occurring since the days of George Washington — Bush’s tax cuts received media scorn. Even when the economy was humming along, seemingly endless articles warned of a coming recession. When the economic downturn finally came, Bush alone was the culprit. For 8 years, if something went wrong, Bush got the blame.
To the surprise of no one, President Barack Obama’s policies aren’t attracting the same bright light of media scrutiny. When bad news crosses the wire nowadays, it’s hard to find any connection between what our President is doing and the distress at hand. One is tempted to think a media fix is on.
Case in point. Last Saturday the Associated Press ran a story about this year’s record federal deficit. AP writer Martin Crutsinger didn’t pull any punches, as evidenced in these opening remarks:
“What is $1.42 trillion? It’s more than the total national debt for the first 200 years of the Republic, more than the entire economy of India, almost as much as Canada’s, and more than $4,700 for every man, woman, and child in the United States. It’s the federal budget for 2009, more than three times the most red ink ever amassed in a single year. And, some economists warn, unless the government makes hard decisions to cut spending or raise taxes, it could be the seeds of another economic crisis.”
Yikes! Who’s to blame for this possible catastrophe in the making? What miscreant has mortgaged our children’s future? Shockingly, you won’t discover the person responsible for all this red ink by reading the rest of the story. Crutsinger carefully avoids mention of Barack Obama’s spending until the next to last paragraph. Instead, he refers to “government spending” and “government debt” (and related obscurities) 14 times, as if the decisions to spend like a drunken sailor were made by a shapeless, nameless force. Still more shocking, the first mention of Obama is designed to show our Spender-in-Chief in a positive light. “President Barack Obama has pledged to reduce the deficit…,” writes Crutsinger while failing to add Obama is The One who wracked up these knee-weakening numbers. Readers are expected to give thanks that Barack is on the case.
A blurb in my local paper was headlined “Swine flu hits hard, claims 11 more kids.” Adding to the angst is this gem, “the government [may the Force be with you!] warned Friday that vaccine supplies will be even more scarce than expected through this month.” Kids are dying because of manufacturing delays, yet the piece makes no reference to The One Man who could fund a billion doses. Don’t expect Kanye West to say, “George Bush Barack Obama hates blacks kids.” No need for CNN to send Anderson Cooper to the home of one of the stricken children to file a teary-eyed report. Don’t hold your breath waiting for, “Where’s George Bush Barack Obama?! Doesn’t he care that kids are dying?” Of course he cares, he feels our pain, and he has bigger fish to fry. Like pitching Chicago for the 2016 Olympics.
In our brave new media world, Barack Obama is above it all.
Posted by Jerry Pomeroy in Media, Obama Presidency