Howard Kurtz: Media Scrutiny of Romney Increased Because Press Now Think He Can Win
Howard Kurtz spoke an inconvenient truth on Sunday that should be extremely embarrassing to the entire Obama-loving media.
At the end of a lengthy segment about the coverage of the presidential campaign, the host of CNN's Reliable Sources said, "The reason that Romney is getting so much scrutiny right now is because the press belatedly, in my view, has finally come around to the view that he may win this election" (video follows with transcript and commentary):
HOWARD KURTZ: I would just make the closing point that I think the reason that Romney is getting so much scrutiny right now is because the press belatedly, in my view, has finally come around to the view that he may win this election.
I think, a month ago, the conventional wisdom was the president is going to skate in. And now, with the polls being tight, with Romney outraising him in the latest period and the economy having that bad jobs report, there is a sense that this is going to be a very close election and we could possibly be looking at a Romney administration. And that's the reason that the scrutiny I think has jumped up a notch.
In some sense Kurtz is right, as there's no question that recent polls, Obama campaign missteps, and bad unemployment numbers are causing angst in the liberal media leading to more scrutiny of his opponent.
However, as NewsBusters has been reporting since last year, the press have been attacking all of the Republican presidential candidates since the GOP debates began.
That the scrutiny of Romney has suddenly increased is likely more a function of him being the presumptive nominee as well as all the other targets disappearing.
However, now that it has become clear that the former Massachusetts governor does indeed have a chance at winning in November, the attacks on him and his wife have become more numerous, more petty, and more personal.
Athough this can't possibly be a surprise to NewsBusters readers - we've been predicting for almost two years the eventual GOP nominee would face such scrutiny! - it is never the less appreciated Kurtz would accurately point his finger at his colleagues.
If only it would do some good beyond giving folks on the right a sense of vindication.
To receive my articles hot off the presses follow me on Twitter ow.ly/btalc and Facebook ow.ly/btald.
— Noel Sheppard (@NoelSheppard) June 9, 2012
- Noel Sheppard's blog
- Login to post comments
















Comments
Ha Ha Ha!! Really!?!?!?!?
Submitted by Blonde on Sun, 06/10/2012 - 3:09pm.
That's funny, NS. Truly, hilariously funny.
Idiots.
Handy Reference Guide to Obama's Gaffes and Goofs ~ Currently Numbering 200 (and Counting)
Kurtz
Submitted by HudsonRiverGirl on Mon, 06/11/2012 - 7:19am.
Kurtz spent a lot of time in the pretzel position defending the private economy is fine statement by the empty suit.
Being a credible candidate for POTUS is enough for scrutiny?
Submitted by CO2Maker on Sun, 06/10/2012 - 3:23pm.
Well, what about being president?
Or for that matter, why does having a credible chance to win earn you press scrutiny in 2012 but it didn't back in 2008, when no one gave McCain a betting chance to win, even after he decided to soup up his chances with a Shelby turbocharged VP candidate?
Because we all know the MSM
Submitted by Bluesman on Sun, 06/10/2012 - 4:02pm.
Because we all know the MSM and their beloved "Da One" may be gone come this November.
We also know the MSM did not fully Vet Da one in 2008 and probably this election year as well. Double standard CO2Maker
Just because the MSM realizes that Obama can lose...
Submitted by KyWriter on Sun, 06/10/2012 - 3:48pm.
...doesn't mean it will not continue to shill for him to the very last moment.
It's been a lot longer than that.
Submitted by CobraMan on Sun, 06/10/2012 - 4:06pm.
"However, as NewsBusters has been reporting since last year, the press have been attacking all of the Republican presidential candidates since the GOP debates began."
It's been a lot longer than that. I remember them doing this when Nixon ran in the 70's. They've been dong it ever since. Just look how they treated Sarah Palin in in 2008. "One heartbeat away," wasn't that the MSM mantra?
The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States. The US Constitution
Unless you're a fetus. The US Supreme Court
Or Anwar al-Awlaki.
That's funny!
Submitted by OxyCon on Sun, 06/10/2012 - 4:35pm.
That's the same reason why the media DIDN'T scrutinize Obama in 2008..."because they thought he could win" and they didn't want to blow it for him by revealing his sketchy past and radical associations.
I suppose we should perhaps thank the media...
Submitted by The_Barrel_Guy on Sun, 06/10/2012 - 9:33pm.
If the libtard media had done their job properly in 2007 and 2008, we would likely be facing a nearly unbeatable incumbent President Hillary Clinton...
Whether we like it or not, there is a certain pragmatism to our governance... The Clintons understand it... 0bama does not... McCain was a lightweight, is a lightweight and will forever be a lightweight... He would have lost to either Clinton or 0bama...
Hillary would surely have done things we did not like and gotten laws passed that we thought were awful... But I doubt she would have even tried -- and then surely unsuccessfully -- to hijack the whole healthcare system in this country... She would have tried for liberal goals, but I doubt she would have tried for an obvious socialist agenda...
More than anything Hillary does not get either her supporters nor her detractors super energized... That would lead to a lazy election cycle which she would likely win absent a fiery Republican... Instead what now shapes up is likely to be really exciting... According to Rasmussen, 40% of the voters "Strongly" disapprove of 0bama... That is a great base to build on... We really do have a good chance of taking this thing...
So... In a backhanded sort of way... "Thank you" to the idiot media...
Here we are 3 1/2 years into the screw, and Howie and his...
Submitted by Dave. on Sun, 06/10/2012 - 4:49pm.
...Marxist State Media cohorts still haven't vetted a so-called president that is very rapidly driving this nation right over the cliff.
-Dave
Vote for the American in November
The NYT has an explanation why Romney may win ...
Submitted by MelvinBonzarelli on Sun, 06/10/2012 - 7:21pm.
See today's (Sunday's) NY Times web site (I don't buy the paper, so I don't know if this story was also in the print edition) at: http://campaignstops.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/06/09/how-racist-are-we-ask-...
The Times is already explaining away a possible Romney victory by 'proving' via Google searches that most Americans are rabid racists and would vote for Romney only because they don't want a black man in the White House.
The excuses are already flying.
Hopefully Romney and company will grow a pair in enough time before election day to take these clowns to the cleaners.
Sublimely played!
Submitted by Blonde on Mon, 06/11/2012 - 1:25am.
This is the first and biggest (bunch of bs) we are going to hear once the election rhetoric gets ramped up.
"Google Insights to Racism".....O.M.G! Check out this idiocy:
Add up the totals throughout the country, and racial animus cost Mr. Obama three to five percentage points of the popular vote. In other words, racial prejudice gave John McCain the equivalent of a home-state advantage nationally.
It gets worse from there.
I hope one of the big wigs here reads your link....because it is, as they say...
SIGNED, SEALED, DELIVERED evidence of media bias.
Handy Reference Guide to Obama's Gaffes and Goofs ~ Currently Numbering 200 (and Counting)
1 Year
Submitted by Jerry Mack on Sun, 06/10/2012 - 10:39pm.
It has been almost or about a year since I last watched Reliable Sources. Too much lieing about cable news ratings and Obama smoozing. The last straw was when left wing hack David Shuster was introduced as a guest contributor. I turned it off and it will probably be a year or so before I watch it again. As for his comments on Romney scrunity, Kurtz wants people to believe that he is the person living under a rock in the insurance commercials. Or maybe he believes that we have.
They have names
Submitted by gwalt on Mon, 06/11/2012 - 7:48am.
The "press" have names. Let's use their names and faces--- against them out in the public arena.
"A lot of briefing for a 2 hr. special with Dan Rather. Saw the show & wonder why we bothered". Ronald Reagan