This isn't really apologetics related, but when I read the following in a story entitled A hurricane strips off Bush's teflon by Marvin Kalb for the International Herald Tribune dated Wednesday, September 28, 2005, I was astounded.
Suddenly, as if the flood waters had smashed not only the levees in New Orleans but the teflon-protected presidency of George W. Bush, networks and newspapers have again found their voice. An embarrassing four-year period of media deference to the president and his policies has ended.
For the first time since the 9/11 terrorist attacks, when an understandable feeling of patriotism induced timid coverage of White House policy in Afghanistan and Iraq, journalists have now returned to their traditional role as fearless chroniclers of the passing parade, blasting the administration for its tardy, ineffective response to the hurricane. Indeed, they have even gone beyond their traditional role.
Instead of acting like deferential, yet objective stenographers of administration briefings, they have adopted a new, angry, emotional style that has surprised and stunned the usually masterful spin merchants at the White House.
Deferential press? Timid coverage of the Bush White House? Good grief. If Mr. Kalb thinks that the press has been deferential to Bush, he needs to read some more newspapers and news magazines. He certainly hasn't been reading the papers I read.