Home Store In Memoriam Deborah Newsletter Forum Topics Blogfeed Blogroll Facebook MySpace Contact Us About

"Democrat" Greta Van Susteren Outdoes Karl Rove In Attacking Obama

Reported by Ellen - May 8, 2010 -

“Democrat” Greta Van Susteren was so eager to attack President Barack Obama that she cooked up a reason not even Karl Rove could get behind. It was part of an On The Record discussion last night (5/7/10) about the Los Angeles Times' decision not to endorse anyone in the upcoming primaries for the U.S. Senate or Governorship. The Times criticized all or nearly all the candidates, and noted, “In both parties, the races for governor and Senate have been undermined by politics and money.” The Times also said that it would endorse candidates in the general election. But Van Susteren focused on the lack of endorsement for Democratic incumbent Barbara Boxer. Van Susteren, on an anti-Democratic roll, then tried to take it a step further by “asking” if the Times’ lack of endorsement had also been a slap in the fact of President Obama. Not even Rove would go there. With video.

It’s not as though Rove was in a friendly mood toward Democrats. He cited the “Don’t call me Ma’am” incident and called Boxer, “a (sic) unpleasant person and… an overweening politician.”

Van Susteren did say, “But a lot of women sort of applauded her for standing up.”

But, as though to make up for that wee bit of Democratic spirit, she immediately moved on to cast aspersions on Obama. “President Obama’s now twice gone out to campaign for her and is this sort of a slap in the face of President Obama? Because remember, in 2008, the L.A. Times endorsed President Obama, saying that he had showed ‘maturity, steadiness, consensus builder, inspires confidence’ and now he’s telling the people of California, ‘Vote for Senator Boxer’ because she’s essentially his candidate. And the L.A. Times says, ‘Forget about it. We’re not doing it.’”

It was a ludicrous "question." In the first place, the L.A. Times may well endorse Boxer in the general election. Secondly, it’s a huge stretch to suggest that the Times’ decision had anything to do with anyone other than Boxer and the other candidates.

You know Van Susteren had to be waayyy off base if someone like Karl Rove would not join her in the attack. Not only would he not endorse Van Susteren's attack, Rove actually defended Obama. He said, “The president has got an obligation. Any president has an obligation to go in and help members of his party who are up for re-election in difficult straits (sic). And I think President Obama’s demonstrated admirable loyalty by going out there and doing these two events (for Boxer)… I don’t think the L.A. Times… like any newspaper would be particularly swayed by the president’s involvement if they have strong and harsh feelings towards Barbara Boxer.” And then he was off on another tear against Boxer.

Another example of Fox News fairness and balance.


Petitions by Change.org|Start a Petition »