The Washington Post found another Republican 2016 contender to bash. Reporter David Fahrenthold on Sunday devoted 2,491 words to a supposedly straight news story on the "lost," "infamous" Bobby Jindal. According to the aggressively negative piece, the Louisiana governor's presidential hopes are "stalled" and the "onetime GOP star is at risk of becoming an afterthought."
Fahrenthold declared, "For the first time in a life of wild successes, Jindal looks lost... On his latest trip to South Carolina, it appeared that Jindal’s unofficial campaign was not going the way he had hoped."
Fahrenthold moved on to Jindal's "infamous" Republican response from 2009. (Isn't "infamous" a word usually reserved for acts of terror and murder?) He wrote:
But then came Jindal’s infamous 2009 televised response to Obama’s first speech to Congress.
In that response, Jindal emphasized how his parents’ journey had given him an immigrant’s optimism about America. It’s a great story. Jindal botched it.
“My own parents came to THIS country from a DISTANT land,” he said, in the overly earnest voice of a man talking to a circle of toddlers. “My dad... would tell me, BOBBY, AMERICANS can do ANYTHING. I still believe that to THIS day.”
The journalist added, "The speech was so bad it seemed to taint its message." Remember, this was not an opinion piece. Also, note the choice of all caps. You can listen to Jindal's speech here and decide if this editorial decision by the Post was necessary.
Later Fahrenthold concluded, "Throughout Jindal’s life, whenever he set a goal, he could always convince other people that he deserved it. But now, Jindal’s audience is slipping further out of range."
This is the same Post reporter who devoted 2,223 words to probing Scott Walker's college life. Fahrenthold found that the potential candidate didn't work hard in French class and that his supporters in a student election stole copies of the campus newspaper. Not exactly investigative journalism at its best.
