Liberals are complaining bitterly about press coverage of the Rod
Blagojevich scandal. "[T]he media have tried to shoehorn Barack
Obama into the Rod Blagojevich scandal," as Jamison Foser of
Media Matters put it in a 2,900-word tirade Friday:
Most telling is the tendency of many journalists to speculate
that the Blagojevich scandal may ensnare Obama without
acknowledging that the complaint against Blagojevich contained
absolutely no evidence of wrongdoing by Obama . . .
Associated Press reporter Liz Sidoti set the standard for
pointlessly speculative news reports with an "analysis" piece
declaring that "President-elect Barack Obama hasn't even
stepped into office and already a scandal is threatening to dog
him." . . .
We cannot afford to be distracted from serious problems by
overheated conjecture and baseless insinuation masquerading as
journalism.
That's how the media behaved the last time we had a Democratic
president. They devoted wall-to-wall coverage to invented
"scandals," ignored exculpatory evidence, saw evidence of guilt
everywhere, took people out of context in order to accuse them
of lying, and generally behaved like a pack of wild animals who
couldn't tell right from wrong or truth from fiction -- or who
simply didn't care. As a group, they behaved without ethical
standards and without regard for the truth.
Foser is correct that nothing now known indicates wrongdoing on
Obama's part. However, the revelation that Obama's choice for
chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel, was in communication with
Blagojevich --
sending him a list of potential Senate replacement appointees
acceptable to Obama -- undermined Obama's
press conference claim that "no representative of mine would
have any part in any deals related to this seat."
Foser
compares the press coverage to how the Whitewater scandal dogged
the Clintons, but a more accurate analogy would be to the scandal
that felled Jimmy Carter's OMB director, Bert Lance. A Georgia
banker and influential figure in state Democratic Party politics,
Lance was forced to resign eight months into the Carter
administration by
revelations about his financial dealings. Lance was never
convicted of any crime, and the scandal involved no suggestion of
wrongdoing by Carter, and yet the swirl of accusations damaged --
if it did not entirely destroy -- Carter's image as a
squeaky-clean reformer. Perhaps most importantly, the Lance
scandal brought an early end to whatever honeymoon Carter had
enjoyed with the Washington press corps.
The scolding of Foser and other liberals won't undo the damage
that the Blagojevich scandal has already done to Obama, and more
damage is likely. The Republican National Committee has
issued a Web video aiming to cement in the public mind the
idea that Obama (a) is a close ally of Blagojevich, and (b) has
been dishonest in his responses to the scandal: