There was a time when one might have considered media bias a subtle thing, difficult to ferret out. That time has past. Sarah Kugler of AP reported today:
“Sarah Palin criticized Democrat Barack Obama over the amount of money he has requested for his home state of Illinois, even though under Palin’s leadership has asked Washington for 10 times more money per citizen for pet projects”
Note how AP reports on the McCain/Palin statement on earmarks, but immediately, without attribution, cites the Democratic response that “Alaska under Palin’s leadership has asked Washington for 10 times more money per citizen for pet projects.” This argument is misleading in at least two ways.
First, Alaskan Senator Ted Stevens has been securing a disproportional share of earmarks to Alaska for decades. He did not seek or need Palin’s approval. Indeed, Palin has been battling the Republican establishment in Alaska of which Ted Stevens is a key member. To associate her with the earmarks as if they were here responsiblity is false.
Second, if a governor is offered federal money, it would be a abrogation of his or her responsibility to his or her constituency to not use those resources as efficiently as possible.
This is different from a Senator’s responsibility. A Senator his not only represents his or her particular state, but must keep an eye on national interests. Senator Barack Obama has ignored some of this national responsibility by directing earmarks to his state, Illinois.
Further note the phrasing in the AP article that: “The new line of attack [from McCain and Palin] came after Obama made his first direct criticism of Palin over the weekend…” Obama apparently criticizes, while the Republicans engage in a “line of attack.” There is certainly a different connotation between a “criticism” versus an“attack.” As Obama has argued, “Dont tell me words dont matter.” Indeed, they do and this choice of words reveals something about the character and perspective of the person who wrote them.