Reply #29: Bush's tumbling ratings is the root of all these snarky Kerry comments

[karynnj]

Most news people have started to speak of all the deficits Bush really has. They had to have seen these flaws in 2004 - they were blatantly there. If anyone wrote in political satire that there was a Presidential candidate who needed a wire to give him answers in the debate, it would be considered that this person would be killed by the relevation. Bush had a reputation as a bully from the late 1980s, he gave nasty nicknames to people and he clearly had a mean streak.

Yet the media when beyond ignoring this, they projected an image 180 degrees off from reality. Simultaneously, they actively distorted Kerry's personality by loaded comparisons before people ever really got to know him. The who would stop if a motorist was stranded question shows how successful this was. You can come up with examples of Kerry coming to the aid of others - even saving the life of a Republican. Reading about Kerry, that is a repeated theme. (Even the story where he volunteered to act as an arbitor between nurses and the hospital administration in Boston - was a variation on this.)

Is there even one story of Bush ever taking one step out of his way to help anyone? Even one of his best friends, Karen Hughes knew this when she wrote the snarky comment "We had a hamster too. Let's just say our hamster didn't make it." that the Bush daughters delivered. Kerry's actions went beyond what he had to do - as Alexandra acknowledged, but the big message she (and his crew) sent was that they knew he was there for them. So, if people got the opposite message, where did it come from - the media.

So, now that everyone sees that Bush REALLY is the worst president ever, there is the obvious question of why was he elected. On Chris Matthews, Newsweek's Wolffe bluntly stated that it was because Kerry was a bad candidate. In reality, Kerry was right on every issue. Even the media credits him with doing an excellent job on the debates. Kerry made a few misstatements that the media allowed no corrections on - unlike the way they've ever treated anyone, but the mistatements did not distort his consistent overall message. He came very close to winning. Wolffe's and other media people's slams on Kerry now are just a reluctance on their part to assume their responsibility. Rather than accept that they favored Bush, because they feared lack of access or because their corporate owners preferred they do so, they fall back on Kerry's unlikability - even as there are all the surprised little stories that he is a friendly, warm, funny person.