Turning
Has the Obama administration already passed its expiration date? Well, the New York Times has turned on Obama this weekend. The columnists and the editorial board at the Times have been pounding Obama and his plans mercilessly this weekend. People are beginning to notice.
It’s not unusual for Barack Obama to take a little friendly fire from the Times. But it’s perhaps unprecedented for him to get hit on the same day by columnists Frank Rich, Thomas Friedman and Maureen Dowd-and in the paper’s lead editorial. Their critique punctuated a weekend that started with a widely circulated blog post by Paul Krugman that said the president’s yet to be announced bank rescue plan would almost certainly fail.
The sentiment, coming just two months after the president was sworn in, reflects elite opinion in the Washington-New York corridor that Obama is increasingly overwhelmed, and not fully appreciative of the building tsunami of populist outrage.
Unlike with President Bush, the Obama administration is less apt to dismiss such commentary, at least publicly, as so much carping from an out-of-touch peanut gallery. These are voices that have been sympathetic, and at times gushing toward Obama, during the campaign and in his administration’s early days.
The president and his top aides read the Times closely and react quickly to its reporting and commentary. Tom Daschle, for example, withdrew from consideration as Health and Human Services Secretary amid back tax issues on the same day that the paper ran a tough front-page piece and editorial on what keeping Daschle would mean to the Obama brand.
Does this mean the Times will shift gears and do its level best to unseat Obama as it did to George Bush? No, it is far too early to draw that conclusion. But this got to have Obama worried. Or Obama’s staff worried. This is a big deal. If they lose the Times completely, they lose a lot of their cover.
Via Memeorandum
By William Teach, March 22, 2009 @ 5:09 pm
I love the line: It’s not unusual for Barack Obama to take a little friendly fire from the Times.
Really? The Times has taken a few minor shots over the last week or so, but before then they acted like an abused spouse who tells the doctors and police she fell down the stairs. For the 20th time.
But, yeah, all is not well in Liberal Land when so many big shots are coming down on Obamateur. Expect Gibbs to be snotty and mention this during uh, his, um, ah, next, ah, well, um, press, ah, conference.
I can’t even listen to Gibbs or Obama off his teleprompter, because then I start doing the stuttering crap they do, which is not good in ah um sales or management, not to mention adult conversation.
By Steve, March 22, 2009 @ 5:10 pm
Who’s running the USofA a newspaper?
By martian, March 23, 2009 @ 9:10 am
Do you think the folks at the Times are experiencing a little ‘buyer’s remorse’? It seems to me that a lot of people are starting to experience that phenomenon. A recent poll by Newsmax shows that many of the independent voters who put the Chosen One over the top are now regretting thier vote big time. The problem is that no matter how many people become disillusioned with the Obamessiah, we’re stuck with him for 3 more years and 10 months.
By Mockingbird, March 23, 2009 @ 3:03 pm
Just perhaps the New York Times columnists are realising that the”Commerce Model”(capitalism)is preferable compared to the”Conflict Model”(everything but capitalism).
If the USA doesn’t have free market capitalism, then it’s system will be conflict; we citisens would be getting our stuff of life from barter, black market or…the barrel of our gun.