Mr. Gerson provides us with a valuable lesson in how its done. You know, claim the media is biased without having to actually prove it. He does it by offering a charge but no one to attribute it to. You can see it in the last sentence "Why were the biblical references in Obama's speech not considered a coded assault on the Constitution, as George W. Bush's were sometimes viewed?" Who, What, Where, or When did that happen. Did ABC News say that? Maybe MSNBC, the liberal one? No he doesn't specify because that would require proof and an argument that he would probably lose. This guy took his lessons from Rush seriously.
Michael Gerson - Obamamania in Two Flavors - washingtonpost.com: "If the outcome had been different in November, would John McCain's inaugural coverage have been quite as worshipful as President Obama's -- during which the 'shiver' up the leg of journalists finally became full-fledged convulsions? Why were the biblical references in Obama's inaugural speech not considered a coded assault on the Constitution, as George W. Bush's were sometimes viewed?"
Friday, January 23, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment