You Don’t Say, Kirsten Powers!

The media — with certain notable exceptions, she neglects to add — “seem to have taken their marching orders from the Obama administration” in their coverage of the terrorist attack that killed our ambassador to Libya:

The fact is, most of the major media didn’t even wait for marching orders, but rather began their coverage of the Benghazi massacre with the premise that it was a campaign controversy (which Obama must win), rather than a policy issue (which might possibly damage their beloved idol’s re-election chances). So they were willing and eager to attack anything Mitt Romney said about it or (contingently) to attack him for being silent if he said nothing at all.

The current narrative the media are interested in telling can be summed up in six words: Heads, Obama wins; tails, Mitt loses.

9 comments

  1. She seems to be making some sense lately, but I’m sure it’s just fleeting. Or maybe she’s one of those rare Democrats who actually have a conscience. I honestly don’t know how they can live with themselves.

  2. I hope it is real and not some fleeting thing or just to pander for ratings and approval from Fox viewers. But hey, she is married now, she catches flack from the left for even being on Fox News, and she is around some bright minds there (Megyn Kelly, Britt Hume, etc.)

  3. I’ve always wondered how the lefty journolists manage to keep a straight face as they parcel out Obama talking points. Knowing that Powers used to date Anthony the Weiner – and HE broke up with HER – makes me believe her Fox gig is why she wouldn’t keep up her agitprop. It must be hard to sit with Krauthammer and says things that are just ridiculous.

    You will note that even the NYT & WaPo writers who sit on the panel don’t follow the narrative strictly while on, either.

Comments are closed.