Thursday, February 26, 2004

239 Ire and angst

“Much of the speech was forward-looking. It sought to position Mr. Bush as optimistic and steady in the face of serious challenges to the country and relentless attacks by Democrats who, he said, have failed to say how they would deal with the challenges the United States faces at home and abroad.”

That’s about the only accurate paragraph in the New York Times reportage of President Bush’s speech at a Monday night fundraiser. The reporter, who apparently didn’t hear the same speech the rest did, called it an “attack,” “an assault,” “mocking,” “biting” and an “indirect slap” when he said he wouldn’t “outsource” the military. I can even overlook “it sought to position Mr. Bush” rather than simply saying, “President Bush was optimistic and steady. . .”

What the reporter called “mocking” was a very gentle poke at Kerry done with a twinkle in his eye. He didn’t scream like an Al Gore imitating Howard Dean or whine with a sigh like a John Kerry. And he got a good laugh. George Bush is hardly a spell binding speaker, so a little levity makes it easier to listen.

The reporter, Richard Stevenson, did not editorialize, analyze or exaggerate Kerry’s speech against Bush on the same day which he inserted into the coverage of Bush‘s speech. No, he chose instead the word “said” three times. “In an appearance in New York, the Massachusetts Democrat said he had Mr. Bush "on the run" even before Democrats settled for certain on their nominee. He said the president had failed on the economy, had pursued a "reckless" foreign policy and was practicing "crony capitalism and crony government." . . .In a statement issued after Mr. Bush's speech, Mr. Kerry said: "George Bush's credibility is running out with the American people. They want change in America and I'm running because I am determined to bring that change and put America back on track." "

It’s pointless to remind readers again about the NYT partisan position, but I do wish in general reporting this early in the campaign, its columnists would make a bit more effort to control their ire and angst.


No comments: