I wanted to add to what Alana and Jonathan wrote about the nearly endless front page story in today’s Washington Post.
The title of the story is “Romney’s pranks could go too far.” Indeed they could. As Ed Morrissey wrote, what Mitt Romney, then in prep school, did — clip the bleached-blond hair of a high school student while he was pinned to the ground and crying for help – is pretty cruel. “It’s one reason not to vote for a teenager for president,” according to Morrissey.
As for other things that could go too far, in addition to Barack Obama’s admitted drug use, we could add to the list Jeremiah Wright’s sermons, Bill Ayers’s domestic terrorism, and Obama’s support as a state senator for infanticide, to name just three. But did the Washington Post devote 5,000 words to each of those stories? Did it devote 5,000 words to all of those stories combined? I doubt it.
What the three of us are saying is that the Post was noticeably more indifferent to things from Obama’s past – at least those things that might not reflect well on him — than they appear to be when it comes to Romney’s past. Consider this story a preview of coming attractions.
The Washington Post is home to some outstanding reporters and columnists. But it is also a newspaper with a decidedly liberal bent (which is why Obama says he respects it and the New York Times so much). And today’s breathless front page essay (posted online yesterday) on Romney the Mean-Spirited Prankster simply confirms that most of the press, which was embarrassingly one-sided in Obama’s favor in 2008, hasn’t evolved much since then.
None of this is surprising. But that doesn’t make it any less striking.
After the endless macacca drivel, column inch after relentless column inch used against George Allen or the minutia of Perry's N-word-rock and who painted it and when, can anybody be surprised by yet another below the belt job for O by the groupies at Washington's own Weekly Reader? But unless Romney can fight back on the same level or get some super-PAC up to speed to nail O to the wall this wil inevitably erode his support in increments. O is not a nice guy, and his problems extend beyond incompetence to character issues–and they will not hesitate and are not hesitating to raise imaginary red flags over fantasies of Romney's wars against women, gays, African-Americans, Latinos, the struggling 99%, the Van Allen belt and Bambi. Romney doesn't have to be a nicer guy than he needs to be (is).
WHINE……WHINE……WHINE….Never have I seen such twaddle published in such a well-known and respected outlet as yours……….. The article contains no information about Mitt the Bully…but side steps that problem to ask why the MSM doesn't make a big deal over the President's transgressions……….__It’s the old children's argument of "He did it too…so why can't I……….once again………__What ever happened to the folks who once demand others take responsibility for their actions…….. Or has that now become selective and situational in its application, too……….._