Yahoo News just posted an AP story about President Obama and the new tact he is following. The story's title is "Obama breaks from Bush, avoids divisive stands" (very nicely placed under the Yahoo Video banners that is entitled "Obama's order to close Guantanamo spurs debate"). But I guess the writer of the AP story can't imagine how anyone could have a problem with closing of Guantanamo and revoking "a ban on federal funding for international groups that provide or promote abortions." I don't see any controversy there.
Moreover there was scant internet ink given to Obama's admonition to the GOP to move away from folks like Rush Limbaugh (noted on this blog here). I guess I think that is a divisive stance. Also what about the racist ranting of his inaugural benediction? That isn't divisive?
The AP is in the tank for him and folks should get ready to have the world's most positive spin given to a President by the media.
The Yahoo News story stated that Obama's first couple of days was in "sharp contrast with Democrat Bill Clinton, who set the tone for an ideological presidency when he tried to overturn the ban on gays in the military. It pleased liberals, enraged conservatives and angered both the military and Congress, neither of which was consulted."
Note to Yahoo – as reported on 21 January 2009 – "Some troops unhappy about Obama pledge on gays" where the story notes that "Obama spokesman Robert Gibbs, when asked whether the new administration planned to scrap the law, replied on the president's transition website: "You don't hear politicians give a one-word answer much. But it's 'yes'.""
Yeah – no divisive stance there.
As more and more of the expected leftist agenda is enforced, I am sure there will be more stories of the new tone in Washington and how these stands aren't really divisive. Where are the real journalists these days?
OS Roman
No comments:
Post a Comment