Washington Post Admits Pro-Obama Bias

Deborah Howell — the Washington Post’s ombudsman — admits the paper favored Barack Obama during the election:

The Post provided a lot of good campaign coverage, but readers have been consistently critical of the lack of probing issues coverage and what they saw as a tilt toward Democrat Barack Obama. My surveys, which ended on Election Day, show that they are right on both counts….

The op-ed page ran far more laudatory opinion pieces on Obama, 32, than on Sen. John McCain, 13. There were far more negative pieces (58) about McCain than there were about Obama (32), and Obama got the editorial board’s endorsement. The Post has several conservative columnists, but not all were gung-ho about McCain….

Counting from June 4, Obama was in 311 Post photos and McCain in 282. Obama led in most categories. Obama led 133 to 121 in pictures more than three columns wide, 178 to 161 in smaller pictures, and 164 to 133 in color photos. In black and white photos, the nominees were about even, with McCain at 149 and Obama at 147. On Page 1, they were even at 26 each. Post photo and news editors were surprised by my first count on Aug. 3, which showed a much wider disparity, and made a more conscious effort at balance afterward….

But Obama deserved tougher scrutiny than he got, especially of his undergraduate years, his start in Chicago and his relationship with Antoin “Tony” Rezko, who was convicted this year of influence-peddling in Chicago. The Post did nothing on Obama’s acknowledged drug use as a teenager….

So the Washington Post overwhelmingly favored Barack Obama during the election. So what? As usual, the Post is a day late and a dollar short — not a great quality for a newspaper. The election is over and the country is stuck with the least-vetted President of the modern era. Thanks in part to the media’s negligence, America is now hoping that Obama’s substance can match his style. That’s a big gamble in a dangerous world.

Obama: “You can put lipstick on a pig, but it’s still a pig.”

Barack Obama took a not-so-subtle jab today at Sarah Palin, saying: “You can put lipstick on a pig, but it’s still a pig.” Obama’s statement was undoubtedly a reference to Palin’s speech at last week’s Republican Convention, when she said: “What’s the difference between a hockey mom and a pit bull? Lipstick.”

Here’s the video:

Ouch! This comment is not going to sit well with any woman who isn’t already in the tank for Obama.

Style Over Substance: Obama Delivers Coronation Peroration, Clarifies Platform

Barack Obama’s convention speech before 84,000 screaming partisans was high theater. Just getting that many Democrats to cheer in unison is an accomplishment. (Woodstock was the last time this many cheering liberals gathered in one place.) But getting them there without readily accessible pot? Now that’s truly a feat!

Of course, Senator Obama’s speech was more spectacle than substance…

Read more

Left eats its own–Bill Clinton defends “I am not a racist”

Kate Snow recently interviewed Bill Clinton for ABC’s Good Morning America. During the interview, Clinton defended his conduct during his wife’s primary election against Barack Obama, asserting: “I am not a racist.” That an ex-president–indeed, the so-called “first black president”–would have to defend himself against charges of racism is a testament to the way the left destroys anyone, including a former beloved member.

Indeed, Dennis Prager made this point on his August 4, 2008 show. The following clip is outstanding:

Dennis Prager Show, August 4, 2008, Hour 2, “I Am Not a Racist” Episode

Paris Hilton for President?

With friends like these, Barack Obama doesn’t need enemies. Ouch!