Two prominent Dems call out the press on lack of Libya coverage

It's not going to do much good, but at least the record has been made.

Former Carter pollster Pat Caddell:

"First of all, we've had 9 days of lies...If a president of either party...had had a terrorist incident and gotten on an airplane [after remarks] and flown off to a fundraiser in Las Vegas, they would have been should have been, should have been, the equivalent, for Barack Obama, of George Bush's "flying over Katrina" moment. But nothing was said at all. Nothing will be said.


It is [unacceptable] to specifically decide that you will not tell the American people information they have a right to know. [The MSM] has made themselves the enemy of the American people. It is a threat to the very future of the country; we've crossed a new and frightening line on the slippery slope, and it needs to be talked about." (HT: Anchoress)

Kirsten Powers is even more worried:

There are so many unanswered questions, not just about Libya, but also about Cairo. Who is it that Rice thinks "widely disseminated" this "movie"? Surely she can't believe that the Egyptian Coptic Christian who made the video had the capacity or even desire to put it in the hands of the people who did the inciting. Also, has the administration noticed that the mob in Cairo, so spontaneously upset about the video, just happened to be carrying an Islamist flag to hoist over our embassy? On 9/11. What a massive coincidence.

Also, where did Rice get her very detailed information about the attack in Libya? She referred to the attackers as "a small handful of heavily armed mobsters" who merely took advantage of a growing protest over the video, a protest that now appears never to have occurred, as was reported three days before her appearances. The administration is careful to point out that Rice couched everything she said as being the best assessment at the time. Fine. But where did that assessment come from and how could it have been so wrong, especially when all signs pointed to a terrorist attack?

We know now that before the attacks on 9/11 that killed 3,000 Americans, more attention should have been paid to attacks against the U.S. overseas. These were warnings of what was to come. They say curiosity killed the cat. In this case, lack of curiosity on the part of the American media very well may kill more Americans. (HT: Hot Air)

I had an IM discussion with an old internet friend where we both, independently, have come to the conclusion that this is the absolute worst bias against a Republican shown by major media in our lifetimes. Nothing comes close. Every day is "Get Romney" day while the president is given a pass - not only for what he says about Romney that isn't true, but for his own lies and omissions.

We both agreed that we thought the press treatment of Reagan was the worst  previous to this. Then, it was disdain shown for a former actor, thought to be a lightweight. This time, it's deliberate character assassination. They are not even trying to cover up their non-objectivity. They don't care. Cadell and Powers, and others, can accuse them of bias from now until the election and they will either laugh it off or ignore it.

Romney isn't guiltless. He has given the press enough fodder to aide them in their destructive narrative. But so has Obama - except you'd never know it by the treatment doled out by major media.

Pat Caddell and Kirsten  Powers can see it. It's too bad a few more won't.

If you experience technical problems, please write to