As NewsBusters has been reporting for a number of weeks, some key figures at the Washington Post have been breaking from the Obama-loving pack and actually pointing out the absence of substance behind all the junior senator from Illinois' flash.
Add Jim Hoagland to the list who clearly wasn't as impressed with the presumptive Democrat presidential nominee's speech in Berlin as most of his colleagues in the press.
Here's what he told PBS's Charlie Rose Thursday (video embedded right):
JIM HOAGLAND, WASHINGTON POST: I think the Europeans will like what they heard today, but the target audience really is the American audience. It was a political speech more than a foreign policy speech. It was a good example of Obama`s soaring rhetoric, his aspirational ability to inspire people. But it was lacking in specifics on what he is going to really ask of the Europeans and Germans, in particular, if and when he becomes president. While it was a good speech, it does not rank at the top of the list of the speeches he has given in this campaign so far.
CHARLIE ROSE, HOST: He at least was asking them to send troops to Afghanistan, wasn`t he?
HOAGLAND: I don`t think he specifically talked about the real problem that the German military presents, which is that they`re a series of caveat, a series of restrictions on what they can do. That`s the hard case to be argued between the United States and Germans. And he did not touch it today and I can understand why. This was a political gathering. It was an occasion to project an image of Europeans, the rest of the world eager for the change that he promises. So I understand why he didn`t want to take on that degree of a difficult subject. But at the same time, he may have missed an opportunity.
ROSE: An opportunity to point to specific ways that the division can be healed rather than just saying there is a division and we must heal it?
HOAGLAND: I think that`s right. He did have that opportunity today, and he chose to play it in a more political vein than in a policy vein. Again, that`s quite understandable, but it does detract a little bit from the value of this occasion.
Of course, when Rose moved to former Washington Post correspondent Robin Wright -- the supposedly impartial press member who in October 2007 explained to Howard Kurtz why declining American casualties in Iraq wasn't newsworthy! -- the fawning and gushing over the Obamessiah predictably commenced. Regardless, one has to wonder what's going on at the Post for so many of its writers -- and editorial staff -- to be willing to discuss Obama's lack of attire.
—Noel Sheppard is the Associate Editor of NewsBusters.



















Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Noel....it looks like...
July 26, 2008 - 11:09 ET by BEGRUNTObamatrons iron grip on the press may be weakening....we can only hope. Also, if he keeps treating the press like he did on his magical mystery tour, like he doesnt need them anymore, he is going to have some real peoblems.
"If a man does his best, what else is there"?
General George S. Patton Jr.
Timing / Obama: I have seen the Mountain Top
July 26, 2008 - 11:52 ET by lareeI think Obama may peak too soon before the general election. Alot of people blamed Hillary losing the Dem Primary because she peaked to late, in the Primary Race. The protracted Campaign season, may be the downfall of the Dems. They already have had 2 casualties Michigan and Florida.
Rock Star FANS don't know that...
July 26, 2008 - 11:55 ET by JayTeeThe Rock Star is Screwing their Girfriend before they go on Stage.
Rock Star Fans don't look beyond the "Presentation"....the MSM Builds/Makes/Breaks Rock Stars....What remains to be seen is if the "Former MSM" can build a Presidential Campaign using their Networks as "PRESS SECRETARIES" for Obama.
If Congress and it's Leadership doesn't pass a "DRILL FOR OIL" energy bill, all the Kings horses and all the Kings men, won't be able to put together a Democratic congress Again.
Meanwhile, Obama does NOT retract his "Surge will Not Work" statements....except from his Web site.
The Republican Revolution will not be Televised
A WaPo Endorsement for McCain....?
July 26, 2008 - 12:01 ET by trak65The Post's editors may endorse McCain over Obama. The Post editorial board favored the Iraq invasion and has never really backed off that position. They agree with both candidates on carbon emissions, but also are more pro drilling--more with McCain. They disapprove of Obama's eschewal of public financing. "For President: John McCain." You heard it here first -- unless you heard it somewhere else!
trak
July 26, 2008 - 12:18 ET by Noel Sheppardtrak,
I was waiting for someone to ask this question. Bravo.
I thinks it's a VERY interesting question, and one to watch. As a relative newcomer to media analysis, and a Californian, I'm not aware enough of WaPo endorsements to comment. I will seek some assistance. ns
Big media
July 26, 2008 - 12:18 ET by serfer62I hope the press keeps elevating OHbama. Look what it has done to NYT; an 82% loss in one quarter. Its the 2 birds with 1 stone parable.
Personally,
July 26, 2008 - 14:36 ET by DelsaI do not think Hoagland cares one whit what SOBama's policyes are.
Furthermore, I do not think the fact SOBama was not specific bothered him either.
He does not want SOBama to be specific because if he were to be specific, the majority of voters might not like it or him.
I don'b buy Hoagland?
Obama's Humility
July 26, 2008 - 17:19 ET by kiwikitis non-existent. Robin wishes he could convey it but instead Obama comes across as an elitist who looks down on all the regular (rational) people.
----
July 26, 2008 - 21:17 ET by dahliatraversThis wasn't terribly cutting criticism. But it was a notable observation because he also wasn't gushing over Obama, like far too many of his collegues in the media.