Ombudsman urges Post to “scrutinize” Obama

The Washington Post’s ombudsman,Patrick B. Pexton, writes a column this weekend advising the newspaper to “Scrutinize President Obama’s record” after he read the reportage that preceded the 2008 election;

I think there was way too little coverage of his record in the Illinois Senate and U.S. Senate, for example, with one or two notably good exceptions. But there were hard-hitting stories too, even a very tough one on Michelle Obama’s job at the University of Chicago Medical Center.

And that’s what The Post needs to do in covering his reelection campaign this year: be hard-hitting on his record and provide fresh insight and plenty of context to put the past three rough years into perspective.

Yeah, this me not holding my breath.

Of course, if the Post had scrutinized Obama’s previous legislative record, the would have had to admit that record was light on actual performance, and he probably wouldn’t have been the nominee and we’d have another Clinton presidency (because admit it, John McCain wasn’t winning against anyone that year). Obama shouldn’t have been in the Senate based on his performance in the Illinois legislature

Pexton continues that the Post should highlight Obama’s performance in office as president. Yeah, that’s pretty sparse, too. What isn’t sparse is his drive towards partisan division focusing on politicizing the Executive Branch. Things like the Fast and Furious failure, the Solyndra debacle, the Philadelphia Black Panther prosecutions which never happened, losing the house to Republicans, failure to go ahead with the Keystone Project, failure to approve oil exploration in Alaska, the Gulf cleanup, the failure to capitalize on the riots in Iran, compromising on the Afghanistan surge, well, you get the idea.

But the Post is too focused on defeating any Republican candidate than on informing the public. Pexton’s column is just the Post’s way of saying “See, we’re not biased”, and nothing will change.

Category: Barack Obama/Joe Biden, Media