Obama Hit Over Economy Remark; The Media Vs. Mitt
KURTZ: Mitt Romney has faced plenty of stories this year about his flaws and his foibles, his wealth and his past. For instance, that report of cutting the hair of a gay student back in prep school. And that prompted conservative commentators to declare a double standard.</s>BERNIE GOLDBERG, FOX NEWS CONTRIBUTOR: This was also on page one today of "The New York Times," not just the "Washington Post." If the media is interested in what Mitt Romney did when he was 17 years old in high school, how come it wasn't interested in what Barack Obama did when he was at Columbia University and what kind of papers he wrote? Were they anti-American?</s>SEAN HANNITY, FOX NEWS: The president in his own words admitting that he rarely went to school, that he drank a lot and used drugs enthusiastically, that he even did cocaine and he said drugs, plural. Where are the media questions about this?</s>KURTZ: Liberal pundits for their part are always on the lookout for new fodder about Mitt like this long ago tale.</s>O'DONNELL: When Mitt Romney wasn't gay bashing kids whose hair he didn't like, Mitt Romney's other favorite sick thing to do was to impersonate a police officer.</s>SCHULTZ: "Politico" has waded into the debate saying Republican complaints of bias often ring true. Joining us to examine this question in Providence, Rhode Island, David Shuster, reporter and anchor for Current TV, and host of We Act Radio's "Tax Action Now." And here in Washington, Jennifer Rubin, CNBC contributor and author of the "Right Turn" blog for the "Washington Post." And, Jennifer, I'm sure you saw this "New York Times" spread of the home section about neighbors being upset about Mitt Romney's mega house in La Jolla, California, lot pool, Jacuzzi, five bathrooms, the whole field. The argument isn't whether the media are fixated -- unduly fixated on Romney's wealth, his houses and what he did in high school. Your take?</s>JENNIFER RUBIN, WASHINGTON POST: Yes, I think so. In fact, I have a whole series and award a prize on Thursdays for the shiny object story of the week -- the nonsensical, the irrelevant, the highly partisan story that really has no information for the average voter in which to make up their minds. It's not a question of this being different than the reporting that was done for Barack Obama when he was a new candidate in 2008 is that we're not covering the current race. We're not covering Barack Obama's performance. We're not going back to see whether his economic policies actually worked. There's a dearth of actual analysis --</s>KURTZ: OK.</s>RUBIN: -- of what's going on at the White House, and instead they substitute this --</s>KURTZ: I don't necessarily agree but I want to bring in David Shuster. "Politico" as I mentioned says the political charge of bias in this race and all the personal story about Romney often rings true. Do you disagree with that?</s>DAVID SHUSTER, CURRENT TV: Well, it's interesting that "Politico" would say that without any sources. And then the sources that they do cite, Ari Fleischer and Haley Barbour. They never mention the Pew nonpartisan study which found President Obama has never received more favorable coverage than Mitt Romney, only because "Politico" says so because they say somehow the "Washington Post" and "New York Times" are biased does that somehow make it true to the right. The fact of the matter is, "The Washington Post" and "New York Times" have done plenty of stories about whether President Obama's policies worked. They had vetted President Obama back in 2007-2008. They are vetting Mitt Romney now. This argument about bias is just the usual B.S. from Republicans who are trying to political purposes to gin up their base. I give them credit, it's smart politics, but it's bunk.</s>KURTZ: One example cited in that political piece, a new biography is about Obama growing up. It's a terrific book. He reveals basically how much dope Obama consumed in college. "The Washington Post" ran that inside the paper whereas the front page of the story about the incident with prep school and cutting the kid's hair.</s>RUBIN: Yes.</s>KURTZ: Is that a strong example, though? I mean, who cares what pages something runs on in the digital age?</s>RUBIN: Well, to a certain extent it does, because first of all, it also runs on the home page on the digital age and there are a lot of people who read the deadwood paper that's on their driveway. But David is wrong. I have written multiple posts within the "Washington Post" -- they give me a lot of running room on all the stories they are not covering, of all of the analysis they are not doing of the last four years, in terms of the last issues, policy outcomes. And that is really being ignored</s>SHUSTER: You just wrote a commentary saying that Barack Obama is poison for the Democratic Party. You're not exactly a neutral observer.</s>RUBIN: No, but --</s>SHUSTER: You're entitled to write whatever you want. But to suggest you're the arbiter of media bias is a little strange.</s>RUBIN: No, if I write 10 things that "The Post" isn't covering, "The Post" isn't covering. Whether I'm biased or not, whether I have a perspective or not, "The Post' is not covering those 10 stories. I didn't lie. No one at "The Post" comes up and says, hey, here's four stories we've done on that. They're not covering the record of Barack Obama.</s>SHUSTER: Jennifer, you believe there's an equivalency between Mitt Romney as a teenager forcibly cutting the hair of a gay kid who was crying and wailing and he can't remember that. You say there's an equivalency between that and Barack Obama's details pot smoking, most of the marijuana details and the pot-smoking years ago. You say there's an equivalency on how the media should treat those stories?</s>RUBIN: I say they are both irrelevant and should get on with the true issues. The president has an interest in not having the media examine his record, and the media is playing along. They are throwing out one shiny object, one irrelevant story after another. In fact, they're not really covering the substantive issues on which most Americans are going to vote on.</s>KURTZ: Well, a quick point, which is one of the reasons that the stories about Obama's drug consumption and so forth as a college student and as a young man haven't had the impact is that he told that himself in his autobiography, which diffused some of that during the '07-'08 campaign cycle. Now, before I come back to this -- bias is not always on one side. For example, I'm still shaking my head over this four-minute video that "FOX and Friends" ran the other week, about 10 days, 14 days ago, that was presented as a great piece of reporting by FOX News, although FOX said in a statement that this hadn't been approved by senior management, nobody has been fired and no disciplinary action. They haven't really denounced it. Let's take a brief look at that video.</s>OBAMA: Hope has been the guiding force behind the most improbable changes this country has ever known. I cannot wait for good jobs or living wages and pensions --</s>KURTZ: David Shuster, not quite fair and balanced in your view?</s>SHUSTER: No. This was a campaign commercial for a network that is run by Roger Ailes, an expert at campaign commercials. FOX should have been ashamed and embarrassed. The fact of the matter is what I found astounding is not that FOX would put this out but their management would claim we didn't know anything about it. You cannot have a four-minute piece as highly edited and polished as that ridiculous piece is without management knowing it. I'm convinced this was a deliberate effort by FOX to put this out there. Then they walk away and say we shouldn't have done it. Yes, come on, they knew what they were doing.</s>KURTZ: OK. Let's be fair, there's no evidence that Roger Ailes had anything to do with it, but obviously somebody who ran that morning program, which is an opinion program, they don't like Obama, the hosts, and that's fine. It just seemed like a parody of a campaign commercial. I want to come back because one of the things that I hear echoing in the blogosphere and elsewhere, Jennifer Rubin, is -- well, Mitt Romney is a rich guy, and the press is obsessed with that. But what about John Kerry? I think John Kerry faced some of this. Not as much in 2004 because it's his wife's money that he inherited. But all the things about Romney being rich and also whether it's his houses, a couple of Cadillacs, his wife has a horse that I guess is going to be in the Olympics or training for the Olympics -- isn't that fair to report when you're running for president?</s>JENNIFER RUBIN, CNBC CONTRIBUTOR: Sure. But all of this is a matter of proportion. All of this is a matter of putting things in context. He's also given more in charity than we'll ever make in our lifetimes in income. So a balanced coverage would also point out that although he's not worth eight figures, the president is worth seven figures. These are not one rich guy and one poor guy. They're two guys, one extraordinarily rich and one just super-rich. So I think there's a limit to what you want to do and that repetition and the plethora of these stories is really excessive.</s>KURTZ: I would argue, David Shuster, one of the reasons -- go ahead.</s>DAVID SHUSTER, CURRENT TV: Jennifer, is it balanced when the "New York Times," four weeks before the 2004 election, does a story about John Kerry's story and his houses? I mean, let's be consistent here. If you think it was unbalanced for the media to talk about this mansion that Mitt Romney is building in San Diego and the impact it has on its neighbors, shouldn't you also publicly say now that it was unbalanced for the "New York Times" to talk about John Kerry's wealth four weeks before the election back in 2004?</s>RUBIN: The "New York Times" was running such a full-time ad for John Kerry. Don't beat up your kind in the coverage in 2004.</s>SHUSTER: Come on.</s>KURTZ: You guys can debate the 2004 campaign off the air. I would just make the closing point that I think the reason that Romney is getting so much scrutiny right now is because the press belatedly, in my view, has finally come around to the view that he may win this election. I think, a month ago, the conventional wisdom was the president is going to skate in. And now, with the polls being tight, with Romney outraising him in the latest period and the economy having that bad jobs report, there is a sense that this is going to be a very close election and we could possibly be looking at a Romney administration. And that's the reason that the scrutiny I think has jumped up a notch. David Shuster, Jennifer Rubin, thanks for stopping by. Up next, is the Obama administration leaking classified information to make the president look good? David Sanger of the "New York Times" on being at the center of this growing storm.