In an Associated Press article worrying over “Election trouble brewing for House Dems in 2010,” reporter Beth Fouhy points to
the likelihood of a highly motivated GOP base confused by the president’s proposed health care plan and angry at what they consider reckless spending and high debt.
Since whether or not the president’s spending has been “reckless” is open to reasonable partisan debate, Fouhy’s “they consider” modifier in front of it is justified. But not before “high debt.”
Does anyone, of whatever partisan persuasion, not think the debt is high and getting higher? No? Then her “what they consider” (emphasis added) high debt is a purely partisan put-down.
But Fouhy’s most extreme partisan bias is revealed by her charge that the “highly motivated GOP base” is “confused by the president’s proposed health care plan.” (Emphasis added)
First, what plan? I thought the details were still being worked out. But the real offense here is the charge, with no evidence provided, that the GOP base is “confused” about Obamacare. That is a defensible statement only if one is willing to assert openly what is assumed here: that the “facts” of the plan (again, what plan?) are as described by the president, so that anyone who disagrees with his various descriptions — that the plan will be deficit neutral; that everyone who wants to will be able to keep their current insurance; that there will no service cuts to Medicare; that there will be no rationing of services; that no illegal immigrants will be served — is “confused,” because the presidents assertions are all factually accurate.
If AP reporters and editors really believe that, why “report” at all? Why not just regurgitate Democratic talking points?
Oh, wait….
