We have always said that there’s a place for bias in the media, and it belongs under the category of “commentary,” or “opinion,” usually on the op-ed page (which is short for, opposite the editorial page). Often, however, those opinions are right in line with the newspaper’s perspective, and that is certainly the case with a recent New York Times column.
This year has hardly been a victory lap for President Obama, but the Times’ Paul Krugman would like his readers to view it as such. “You should judge leaders by their achievements, not their press, and in terms of policy substance Mr. Obama is having a seriously good year,”writes Krugman. “In fact, there’s a very good chance that 2014 will go down in the record books as one of those years when America took a major turn in the right direction.”
Krugman, you see, believes like we do that the media are biased. But Krugman believes that the bias is that the media don’t fawn enough over what he sees as Obama’s great accomplishments, and that “The accepted thing, it seems, is to portray Mr. Obama as floundering, his presidency as troubled if not failed.”
Krugman’s examples are Obama’s signature health reform, and his recent regulations on climate change. Ironically, the same day the Times reported that the administration is “contacting hundreds of thousands of people with subsidized health insurance to resolve questions about their eligibility, as consumer advocates express concern that many will be required to repay some or all of the subsidies.” For a family of four earning $80,000, this could mean they have to repay as much as $2,500 this year, they report.
And this is not the least of the problems plaguing Obamacare. We have reported on the micro networks which lead to essentially no care under this health care insurance, the price hikes, as well as the constant problems and cronyismin herent in the law’s implementation.
As for the climate change rule Krugman refers to, it will cost 500,000 job sand an average of $1,000 in income per family, according to the Heritage Foundation. Krugman, however, views Obama’s new power plant rules as “a real start” in an effort “to save the planet.” The sad part is, Krugman is far from alone in the media in believing this nonsense, assuming he actually believes it.
Then there are the scandals that have rocked the administration this year. Even the mainstream media called the Veterans Affairs health care waiting list scandal a real scandal, although its attention shifted quickly to other matters. With the IRS scandal, the Benghazi scandal, the VA scandal, the Bowe Bergdahl trade, and the first quarter of this year showing negative economic growth, Krugman cannot credibly call this year a “major turn in the right direction.”
And don’t forget Russia, Crimea, Syria, Iraq and Iran. Right direction? Maybe in Krugmanville, but not in the real world.