I pose the following questions to the press and to Obama supporters.
If George W. Bush had filled his cabinet and circle of advisers with people who can't seem to keep current on their income taxes, would you have approved?
If Bush had proposed doubling the national debt (which had taken more than two centuries to accumulate) in one year, and then proposed doubling the debt again within 10 years, would you have approved?
If Bush had promised detailed tracking of the spending from a $785 billion Stimulus Bill, then postponed that oversight until 2010, would you approve or would you think something "smelled fishy"?
If Bush had promised 48-hour advance posting of the same bill on the Internet and only released it two hours before congressional approval, would you wonder what was being hidden from the public?
If Bush and a Republican Congress had given hundreds of millions of dollars to a group (the right-wing equivalent of ACORN) after its members had been convicted of voter registration fraud, would you approve of them to doing the 2010 Census, which will determine congressional districts for 10 years?
Would you approve the press treating President Bush the same way as they are treating Obama — no hardball questions, no investigation of intent and motive?
If you feel that Obama deserves different treatment from the press, and that he shouldn't be questioned on his actions, can you intellectually justify why?
Comments