On Sunday's CNN Reliable Sources, host Howard Kurtz spoke of President Barack Obama's acceptance speech at the Democratic National Convention:
Bob Cusack, Obama gave a pretty good speech overall. The media acted like it was terrible. And it seems to me that perhaps we have set a standard for him that (if) he doesn't he doesn't hit the stratosphere, he has somehow failed.
The media acted like it was terrible? Kurtz must not have been watching CNN immediately after Obama's speech. Observed CNN anchor Wolf Blitzer: "Anderson, he clearly still has that oratorical skill that he's always had over these many years." CNN chief national correspondent John King opined: "I think a very smart, well-crafted speech, both strategically and tactically." CNN senior political analyst David Gergen said, ". . .I thought it was a very strong speech."
CNN anchor Anderson Cooper noted: "Although it certainly wasn't a speech full of soaring rhetoric like some of his speeches four years ago. Some of it comparing sort of to a State of the Union almost in terms of kind of going down a checklist."
Saying that a speech isn't filled with soaring rhetoric isn't the same as saying it's terrible.
Kurtz need not be concerned that if Obama "doesn't hit the stratosphere, he has somehow failed" in the eyes of the mainstream media. He's always been their hero and will continue to be. At least until Election Day.