The media is already finding fault with the Obama choices, especially the Emanuel appointment. After one appointment, the Obama administration is being labelled as partisan and that he, Obama, is a lair, when he said that he wanted to work with the Repubs in a bi-partisan way. After one appointment the morning media is trying to define the whole presidency.
Looks like the partisanship is not gone, looks like the political hatred that started with the Reagan years is not dead. Is it setting the tone for the future or just sour grapes?
Some in the media have gone so far as to say that there would have bewen an outrage if McCain had won and appointed DeLay as his chief of staff. I will agree with them on that…..but not because of partisanship but because DeLay is a lair, a crook and left the Hill in disgrace. Not a very good comparison, but I guess that is the best they can do, for alot of them are in jail or disgraced.
Appears the media has decided that bi-partisanship is not to their liking, they much prefer the drama of partisan fighting. Some want to condemn before it even starts, showing their true colors. I am certain that if McCain had won, he would have been given a better write up his first couple of days.
I am sorry to burst the fragile bubble, but Emanuel may be the best at the job. Why? He knows the White House, he knows the Conress, he knows politics and he is intelligent and competent. Qualities that him a natural for the job of chief of staff.
Washington needs change, the media seems to not want that to occur–they need the drama—ratings you know?