Time magazine's Mark Halperin on Sunday made one of the strongest insider indictments to date about how the Obama-loving media have behaved during this presidential campaign.
Talking with CNN/Washington Post media analyst Howard Kurtz about the "clear, unambiguous double standard" concerning how differently Barack Obama's fundraising and flipflop over taking public campaign funds would be covered by the press if he was a Republican, Halperin boldly stated that any reporter who doesn't ask why that is "is doing themselves and our profession and our democracy a disservice."
Frankly, no greater truth has been spoken about the media's deplorable election coverage the past eighteen months (file photo):
HOWARD KURTZ, HOST: Mark Halperin, we learned this morning that Barack Obama in the month of September raised $150 million. The earlier estimates had been about a hundred. They always kind of leak a lower figure so they can exceed it. If a Republican had not taken public financing, and had raised all that money, and the Democrat was struggling financially, wouldn't we see a lot of stories about one candidate essentially trying to buy the election?
MARK HALPERIN, TIME MAGAZINE: We would. We would also see a lot of stories about his going back on his word saying that he would accept the public money and would reach out to Sen. McCain to try to work out a deal. So, I think this is, this is a case of a clear, unambiguous double standard, and any reporter who doesn't ask themselves, "Why is that? Why would it be different if it were a Republican?" I think is doing themselves and our profession and our democracy a disservice.