[A] White House spokesman just suggested to FOXNews that the White House recognizes that the NY Times has fallen on hard times and may not have the resources to do original reporting! Paraphrasing: “I don’t know if the Times’ junk bond rating is causing a lack of reporting or whether their lack of reporting has caused their junk bond rating.” Heh.

Could have used some of that snark during the past eight years, no?

Amen.

Most of what happened to Bush had to do with the constant villifying [sic], bashing and ridiculing done to this president by the press and twisted views of pundits and so-called comedianes [sic] with a political agenda. He became something to be made fun of. IMO that is what hurt us most in the world. If Americans made fun of their president, posing him as a stupid buffoon why would the rest of the world not do so? How could they trust him?

I made the same point a while back, but not nearly so eloquently or succinctly:

It drives me nuts that the left will be trumpeting their dishonest characterization of this report and that the MSM will remain complicit in that dishonest representation. Worse, they will use their own dishonesty to shout that George Bush can’t be trusted and once again lament our supposed decline in standing in the world, when it is their own dishonesty that creates the perception of George Bush as liar. Call your own president a liar every day for seven years, then complain that the rest of the world doesn’t trust him.

This is but another form of the blackmail from the Left. They have gone way beyond the “loyal opposition” that the party out of power traditionally sets up. (By the way, let’s see if dissent continues to be “patriotic” with The One in office.)

But W and his administration could have done a lot more to answer all the false charges leveled against him. His failure to do so gave the Left a wide open field to run virtually unmolested except by talk radio (which largely preaches to the choir). My previous post noted this as a failure of leadership:

I am just astounded at the inability of this administration to defend itself. Maybe George Bush just honestly believes that the American people are a lot smarter than they really are. He’s naive in thinking that if he does the right thing and acts resolutely, the American people will understand his moves.

If so, he’s dead wrong. Some conservatives, like Rush Limbaugh or Sean Hannity, consistently say that the American people are smarter than politicians give them credit for. I disagree. What’s more, even if the public were as smart as Hannity gives them credit for, a president has to understand that the public requires leadership, including constant reminders of why the government takes the country in a given direction.

Clinton had his team in place to counter “bimbo eruptions” during his campaign and an effective media operation during his administration. Obama likewise was very effective in countering charges (though the media probably would have taken care of that for him all on its own if he hadn’t), and I suspect he will likewise have an effective operation in office.

This is one place W really fell down on the job of leading. Not only did he fail to do it personally, he didn’t even manage to do it through surrogates. And, if I’m being honest with myself, I rather resent him for it.