Mitt Romney, center of squabble between Boston Herald and White House Lehrich
The Boston Heralds has been banned from the press pool covering President Obama’s fund raiser in Boston today. The Herald received the following scolding missive :
I tend to consider the degree to which papers have demonstrated to covering the White House regularly and fairly in determining local pool reporters,” White House spokesman Matt Lehrich wrote in response to a Herald request for full access to the presidential visit.
“My point about the op-ed was not that you ran it but that it was the full front page, which excluded any coverage of the visit of a sitting US President to Boston. I think that raises a fair question about whether the paper is unbiased in its coverage of the President’s visits,” Lehrich wrote.
Apparently, Lehrich left an opening for the Herald noting that the paper may be “allowed” to cover the fundraiser portion of the President’s visit. The Herald article went on to point out a disagreement (or threat) made by the Administration to Hearst’s’ property, the San Francisco Chronicle, for covering a protest at an Obama California fundraiser, as proof that the White House might be selective in which press organizations are allowed near the President – those that cover him “fairly” or those that might highlight a 2012 GOP candidate’s Op-ed, or report on an incident at a fundraiser that reflects negatively on the President.
They should have seen this coming. In his speech in Chicago, immediately following the election results in 2008, then President Elect Obama noted his favorite President was Abraham Lincoln. Those who view history as somewhat predictive of the future, understood that there may have been several reasons a Progressive Democrat would view Abraham Lincoln favorably: the most notable: his suspension of the constitution and the fact that he jailed newspapers editors who published less than complementary articles. Of course, in the case of Obama, and his almost eerie inclination to follow in Jimmy Carters’ footsteps, one can understand that the choice of Lincoln may have been more populist than devious, given the history of the Carter administration is fairly accessible and no real digging is required – therefore, one might be on the fence about the President’s ability to govern from an historical context, or lack thereof, ruling out the academic theory. The most likely indication that this sort of incident might happen, is the administrations choice of staff – and the almost petulant display by some staff members when the President is cast in a bad light (criticized for something that has been done or said, either fairly or unfairly), lacking the experience or the ability to react as an adult.
The fact of the matter is that the Herald did place a Mitt Romney op-ed ahead of the President’s visit to Boston, his second in a short period, the point of the visit to raise funds for the Democrat Party, of which, as sitting President he is the Head of said Political Party – another subject that should raise eyebrows, but somehow does not, when it comes to politics. The sitting President is generally the head of his political party, and the Chairperson of the DNC or RNC takes a back seat – the theory being the President would be the “star” fundraiser, regardless of Party. It’s bad practice for government in general, again, regardless of party.
Therefore, the President is not coming to Massachusetts today to make any grand policy speeches, or to visit the state to stump for re-election but to ask Massachusetts Democrats for money. One has to ask if that is really front page news, or worth a mere mention, when an organization has an op-ed criticizing the President, from a potential 2012 GOP candidate – the Herald chose the Romney op-ed, and is now, apparently being “punished” by the Administration.
The Globe appears to have no such problems, yet. The Globe is covering the President’s visit today, however, some of the articles that are placed on the Home page of the Globe site and the Politics page of the same, might be construed as somewhat Heraldesque.
1. An article entitled: ” West: Obama 'a black mascot' and 'black puppet':
“Cornel West, a Princeton University professor and leading black intellectual, is harshly criticizing President Obama; a candidate he once supported but now calls “a black mascot of Wall Street oligarchs and a black puppet of corporate plutocrats.”
West, a former Harvard University professor, said during an interview with the website Truthdig posted yesterday that the president has not been true to his race.”
Seriously, the man is somewhat of an academic “crank” to put it kindly. The President, whether Black, White, Purple, Yellow or Brown, is the President of all citizens, and should not be labeled as belonging to one group or the other, unless of course, it is a political party. One has to ask is this relevant to the President’s visit?
2. From the Globe’s Politics page ” Leading Democratic contributors from Massachusetts since 2007” the Globe names the top six Massachusetts residents who have heavily contributed to the President; their names, biographies and amount given. From Internet “watchdog” companies, to layers specializing in asbestos suits, to pharmaceuticals, one understands that big business does not always trend Republican, rather, it is the individual who decides whom to support based on ideology, and perhaps the hope of a fair lobbying position.
3. Finally, the icing on the cake: the Globe has praised Mitt Romney with : “A Romney We Can Respect”. The article does not, however, appear on the front page (as does the “Obama is a Puppet “article, rather under local news.) The Globe has finally found something Romney has done that apparently agrees with Globe editorial thought. He defended his position on the Massachusetts Health Care Reform, and he did so with gusto. The Globe could not agree more, however, one had to wade through the usual tirade of Mitt “wrongs” before one got to the Globe’s perception of a Mitt “right”. The wrongs were Romney’s propensity to use PowerPoint, the fact that he calls Massachusetts his ‘home state”, (He may still have a townhouse in Boston, among other real estate holdings scattered about the country, as say, anyone with scads of money may), and pretty much took a shot at Romney’s perfect hair.
Has Matt Lehrich read the Globe today? That’s the question. The fact of the matter is that the slight to the Herald and the way in which the White House missive denying press credentials (or limited credentials) was childish – not what one would expect from a staff member of the President of the United States. In Beantown, where one has the option of choosing one or both daily papers, both should be given access when a sitting President comes to visit, regardless of whether they place the man on the front page, or cover a rival, it is just plain bad politics, and will be perceived as such by those Herald Readers. Instead of granting access and perhaps getting a fair article from the Herald, the choice was made to scold and turn to the Globe – one of the “elite” publications in Massachusetts and as noted above: one that covers the President with “gusto”.
In the end, the local news across the Bay State will be in a tizzy over the President’s visit, as it is rare that a President visits Massachusetts for any reason, unless that President or Candidate is passing through to New Hampshire to camping for an upcoming election, the Bay States now nine electoral votes and late primaries are apparently not enough incentive for anyone to pay too much attention, except for the occasional fund-raiser.
Does it matter that one publication is excluded, one that is a major paper not only in Boston, but across the Baystate – it does on several levels, especially when the President’s poll numbers according to the most fair pollster, Gallup, are dropping daily. In that case, one can ill afford to shut out any news organization when one is literally campaigning for reelection. The theory that Massachusetts is already going to vote to reelect Obama may be the reason, and it may also be flawed. Again, looking at the historical context of this brouhaha between the Press and the President - the only time that Massachusetts, twice in a row, voted for a Republican President, the Commonwealth voted against Jimmy Carter and his economic policies, voting for Reagan, not once, but twice. Romney, it appears understands history and is staying close to the Baystate, where the independents, not the overtly conservative nor the overtly Progressive appear to decide outcomes. (Of course, this assumes that Mitt Romney wins the GOP nomination and goes on to challenge Obama in 2012)
No comments:
Post a Comment