Journalism or Republican propaganda?

A headline at the post on-line today: "GOP urges Dems to scrap bill: Republicans want Democrats to launch bipartisan talks on a new consensus approach."  Right, and I've got a bridge to sell you.  What's so frustrating about this is that the reporter, Shailagh Murray simply credulously repeats all the GOP talking points despite the overwhelming evidence that Congressional Republicans have no interest in actually crafting a bipartisan health care reform (and for the record, Murray seems to be a frequent repeat offender of "unbiased" journalism that serves to mislead readers).  As many, including President Obama, have pointed out, this is a bipartisan bill in substance.  In fact, it is quite similar to what Republicans in the 1990's proposed as an alternative to Clinton's plans.  The Senate bill already bent over backwards to draw support from moderate Republicans, e.g., Olympia Snowe, who could never articulate a sensible reason for opposing it.  What exactly is a "bipartisan" bill that Republicans would actually approve of?  It's quote obvious the answer is nothing.  Republicans keep talking about malpractice reform (a flea on the rabid dog that is our health care system) and eliminating state barriers to regulation (e.g., the credit card company approach– we know how well that's worked).  Real journalism would be honest about the fact that this is nothing more than (effective) PR from Republicans, instead, it is treated as if Republicans really do want bipartisan reform simply because they so despite mountains of contradictory evidence. 

Advertisements
%d bloggers like this: