|
by Greg Pierce, Inside Politics
“Nothing in the hysteria over last week’s Democratic debate – including the unprecedented opprobrium press critics heaped on the ABC moderators – should have come as any surprise,” Dorothy Rabinowitz writes in the Wall Street Journal.
“That doesn’t make it any less fascinating a guide to current strange notions of what is and is not a substantive issue in a presidential contest, or any less striking an indicator of the delicate treatment Mr. Obama’s media following have come to consider his just due,” the columnist said.
“Moderators Charles Gibson’s and George Stephanopoulos’ offense was to ask questions Mr. Obama didn’t want to address. Worse, they’d continued to press them even when the displeased candidate assured them these were old and tired questions.
• “ ‘Akin to a federal crime…new benchmarks of degradation,’ The New Yorker’s Hendrik Hertzberg declared, of the debate.
• “ ‘Despicable.…slanted against Obama,’ Washington Post critic Tom Shales charged.
• “A ‘disgusting spectacle,’ the New York Times’ David Carr opined.
• “The questions had ‘disgraced democracy itself,’ according to columnist Will Bunch of the Philadelphia Daily News.
“The uproar is the latest confirmation of the special place Mr. Obama holds in the hearts of a good part of the media, a status ensured by their shared political sympathies and his star power. That status has in turn given rise to a tendency to provide generous explanations, and put the best possible gloss on missteps and utterances seriously embarrassing to Mr. Obama.”
|
