EDITOR OF REDSTATE
Is This A Subtle Bias At Reuters?
In a story about the White House in damage control mode over the President’s rather stupid remarks on the Supreme Court, Reuters reports the following:
“What he did was make an unremarkable observation about 80 years of Supreme Court history,” Carney told reporters during a White House briefing dominated by the topic.
The president, who taught constitutional law at the University of Chicago, qualified the remark a day later by stressing he meant action by the Court on a matter of commerce, a legal distinction that cut little ice with his critics.
“Since the 1930s the Supreme Court has without exception deferred to Congress when it comes to Congress’s authority to pass legislation to regulate matters of national economic importance such as health care, 80 years,” Carney said.
What Reuters did not bother to report is that, in fact, the Supreme Court has ruled unconstitutional a piece of legislation that passed with a bipartisan majority via the commerce clause just 17 years ago.In referencing Carney’s spin twice and the President’s explanation, would it not have been worthwhile for the news organization to actually point out the undisputed fact that both Barack Obama and Jay Carney are wrong?Heck, even NBC took time away from doctoring 911 tapes to point out that fact. You would think Reuters would actually, after three times broadcasting the White House spin, simply report an actual fact in contradiction to the spin.