New York Post [1]is running a story today:
“June 9, 2004 — DAN Rather and Tom Brokaw work for different networks but agree one thing …. Coverage of Ronald Reagan’s death has been excessive, they say. “
Even Jennings has ‘mixed feelings’ about the coverage of the Reagan proceedings, says the story. And that these anchors have made all these comments, suggests that some underling, trying to make headlines out of hteir OWN thoughts, has called them to ask for an interview, and as a paryt of that interview, has asked these anchors these questions. Clearly more than just these three in the news biz think this way. The line of thought extends down into the bowels of leftist pressdom.
Hmmmmm. Well, now, let’s see here.
These comments, these feelings, are from a press that couldn’t be bothered to report on pre-911 abuses, and in fact now admits to having consciously hidden some stories from the region, so as not to tee off the Tyrant, but now gleefully expounds hour after hour on the one time incident at Abu Girabe.
This is a press who can’t be bothered to give us any of the huge number of positive stories out of that same Iraq today.
This is the same press that constantly reminds us, at the bidding of John Kerry’s advisors, that Mr. Kerry is a ‘nam vet, and yet to this day still hasn’t gotten the nature of Mr. Bush’s service correctly.
This is a press that after giving us dire predictions about the state of the economy going forward, is mute on the explodingly good economic situation we find ourselves in just now.
So, might these same press wonks have some MOTIVE behind wanting to limit the coverage of Mr. Reagan, do you suppose?
Personally, I wish Jimmy Carter a long life, but I can’t help but wonder what will happen, how the press will react to Jimmy Carter’s death, when it happens. Will anyone ask if we’re paying to much attention to his funeral?
Don’t hold your breath.