"Is the loss of Bill Richardson a huge blow to the Obama administration?"
First of all they probably don't think it is, but the sad part is that they're not even asking the right question. The real blow is whether or not the loss of Billy will hurt the American people. Would he have done a good job and help us get out of the huge hole we're in? If yes, we should be talking about how the greater good would be served by keeping him in, if not then it's no big deal. But the media has time to fill and ratings to win, so they'll make it dramatic.
Of course this is nothing new, but that doesn't mean that it's a good thing and that it hasn't gone too far.
You can almost hear the desperation on their voices sometimes, "but shouldn't Obama respond to the situation in Gaza?
The response from every honest "pundit" is that he's doing the right thing and that no we shouldn't, but they'll keep asking the question everyday until it's over or he becomes president. However, the media is mad/scared because they want him to give them something to talk about. They love Obama, and they get bitter when he doesn't give them enough to talk about. After all, 24 hours is a daunting amount of time to fill, but is that an excuse for potentially damaging and generally dumb questions?
Some Articles I've Been Reading and Liking:
Some perspective on the war in Gaza: http://breasy.c
The true impact of the rockets on Israel: http://www.jpos
What's broken on wall street: http://www.nyti
No comments:
Post a Comment