Paul:
This may or may not be part of the same bill (information within the article not mentioned in HR676), but whatever bill this refers to is certainly not something with which I agree . Forcing businesses to offer health care is the antithesis of what you would hope to gain (in terms of economic benefit) from a nationalized insurance program that could compete with private insurance. Not what Obama wanted - but rather what a Congress which leans now too far to the left wants. This is what we get when we play the "extremes" game. You go too far to the right - then you have to pay the price on the left - never achieving sensible policy. Populists to the left and populists to the right - each side professing that if you don't buy their complete "happy meal" of policy that you are indecisive (even though the opposite is true if you don't buy either "happy meal"). That's why you can't get any real news from television.
http://www.economist.com/world/unitedstates/displaystory.cfm?story_id=14031450
It could be worse I guess. Palin could have been the vice president to a frighteningly aging McCain (the man who professed to know nothing about economics, deferring to "you bunch of whiners" Phil Graham).
Robert J. Samuelson
The Obama Infatuation
Is the press giving the president a free pass?
Email To A Friend
Please fill in the following information and we'll email this link.
The Obama infatuation is a great unreported story of our time. Has any recent president basked in so much favorable media coverage? Well, maybe John Kennedy for a moment, but no president since. On the whole, this is not healthy for America.
Our political system works best when a president faces checks on his power. But the main checks on Obama are modest. They come from congressional Democrats, who largely share his goals if not always his means. The leaderless and confused Republicans don't provide effective opposition. And the press—on domestic, if not foreign, policy—has so far largely abdicated its role as skeptical observer.
Obama has inspired a collective fawning. What started in the campaign (the chief victim was Hillary Clinton, not John McCain) has continued, as a study by the Pew Research Center's Project for Excellence in Journalism shows. It concludes: "President Barack Obama has enjoyed substantially more positive media coverage than either Bill Clinton or George W. Bush during their first months in the White House."
The study examined 1,261 stories by The Post, The New York Times, ABC, CBS and NBC, NEWSWEEK magazine and the NewsHouron PBS. Favorable articles (42 percent) were double the unfavorable (20 percent), while the rest were "neutral" or "mixed." Obama's treatment contrasts sharply with coverage in the first two months of the Bush (22 percent of stories favorable) and Clinton (27 percent) presidencies.
Unlike George Bush and Bill Clinton, Obama received favorable coverage in both news columns and opinion pages. The nature of stories also changed. "Roughly twice as much of the coverage of Obama (44 percent) has concerned his personal and leadership qualities than was the case for Bush (22 percent) or Clinton (26 percent)," the report said. "Less of the coverage, meanwhile, has focused on his policy agenda."
When Pew broadened the analysis to 49 outlets—cable channels, news Web sites, morning news shows, more newspapers and National Public Radio—the results were similar, despite some outliers. No surprise: MSNBC was favorable, Fox was not. Another study, released by the Center for Media and Public Affairs at George Mason University, reached parallel conclusions.
The infatuation matters because Obama's ambitions are so grand. He wants to expand health-care subsidies, tightly control energy use and overhaul immigration. He envisions the greatest growth of government since Lyndon Johnson. The Congressional Budget Office estimates federal spending in 2019 at nearly 25 percent of the economy (gross domestic product). That's well up from the 21 percent in 2008, and far above the post-World War II average; it would also occur before many baby boomers retire.
- 1
- 2
- Next Page »
My Take
Each Newsweek reader is different—and now your Newsweek can be, too. Use this page to create a experience that's personalized for you and your interests. My Take: it makes Newsweek whatever you want it to be.










Discuss