Why most conservative articles about Obama are worthless

Toby Harnden, the Telegraph’s man in America, is not a bad guy, but he has a serious credibility problem. Why? Because his job is simply to attack Obama. In virtually every column he writes, he tears Obama apart, portraying him as a leftist, irresponsible, destructive president. Now I happen to agree that Obama is a leftist, irresponsible, destructive president. But what credibility do Harnden’s withering evaluations of Obama have, when taking down Obama is literally all that he ever does?

Here is another sure sign that Harnden is in bad faith on the question of Obama. In his latest column, “Barack Obama: the Great Unravelling of a One-Term President?”, he throws in this:

Obama has even lost Shepard Fairey, the man who created the iconic red and blue “Hope” poster of Obama’s visage. Those who elected Obama, he said this week, feel cheated. “They wanted somebody who was going to fight against the status quo and I don’t think that Obama has done that.”

So Harnden constantly calls Obama a failure because of his way-out leftism, then he turns around and calls Obama a failure because of his insufficient leftism. This is garbage journalism. And so much conservatives journalism is similar to Harnden’s. It’s like a return to the 19th century, when journalists were expected to be unprincipled partisans. However, I doubt that even back in those dark days of party newspapers, a Republican paper would attack a Democratic politician for failing to be a real Democrat. It took our postmodern age to come up with that particular twist.

- end of initial entry -

Jim C. writes:

It’s difficult to be objective about Obama because he’s obnoxious, unintelligent, arrogant, incompetent, a stunning combination of characteristics. I’m amazed that this lightweight got as far as he did, even in the surreal world of affirmative action.

Posted by Lawrence Auster at September 25, 2010 07:07 PM | Send