Tuesday, September 26, 2006

Media bias?

On Sunday, former President Bill Clinton came entirely unhinged when an interviewer dared to ask him about his failure to do anything about the repeated terror attacks against Americans during his term in office. Clinton is so used to being tossed softball questions from a fawning media that any real question seems to him to be evidence of the re-emergence of the vast right-wing conspiracy that is out to get him. It would seem reasonable that after 9/11 we would want to evaluate the events which led up to that attack and learn from the mistakes so that they will not be repeated. But any inquiry into missed opportunities to kill or capture Osama bin Laden during Clinton's administration are seen as personal attacks against the legacy of the former President. Clinton, desperate to avoid accountability for his failures, points the finger at the FBI and the CIA, both of which I seem to recall are part of the Executive Branch of government, and therefore under his control and responsibility. When it is revealed that on numerous occasions the CIA told the President that they could kill or capture bin Laden, and the President wouldn't give the go-ahead, that is newsworthy, and Clinton ought to address it.

The really bizarre thing is that Clinton went on to suggest that the media never asks the Bush administration about their failures. What planet is he living on? The media CONSTANTLY pounds Bush, Rice, Rumsfeld, and the rest of the Administration with hardball questions about real and imagined shortcomings. That is their job, and Clinton's treatment is a cakewalk compared to the grilling that Bush gets.

If there is any question about the existence of a liberal bias in the media, take a look at the headlines on cnn.com yesterday:

The first five "Top Stories" are all reporting liberal attacks on conservatives as undisputed fact.

"But the media is owned and controlled by big, rich Republicans and it does their bidding."

Yeah, right.

No comments: