#lois romano

WaPo quietly edits unflattering Nancy Reagan obituary

The story as it originally appeared on the Post’s website began by gossiping about Reagan’s negatives, her supposed shortcomings and personal struggles. (AP Photo/Scott Stewart/File)

March 07, 2016

The Washington Post has quietly updated its obituary for Nancy Reagan, who passed away this weekend in her home in Los Angeles, after the piece drew criticism for being too harsh on the former first…

Nothing Sacred: WaPo Doesn’t Miss Opportunity to Slam Mrs. Reagan in Obituary

Stay classy, WaPo! Partisan hack writes hateful obituary, then, when busted, tries to change it without telling anyone! From Mediate in an excellent piece by Joe Concha, who precedes the following with some screenshots of some of the inevitable venomous tweets that appeared within seconds that the news of Mrs.Reagan’s death crossed the wires: Enter the Washington Post’s Lois Romano, who…

It is truly sad. We're being played by the very people who claim to be on our side. It's absolutely disgusting!

Amplify’d from www.dailyhowler.com

ADLY, BACHMANN IS SMARTER! David Gregory utterly failed. Lois Romano was worse:

SADLY, BACHMANN IS SMARTER (permalink): The inability to explain squat! The lack of any impulse to try!

These are the defining traits of the modern “press corps.”

We can’t explain how they got this way—and we can’t explain why the “liberal world” so rarely seems to notice their dumbness. (As opposed to their alleged bias.) But lord have mercy, this “press corps” is dumb! Just consider David Gregory’s attempt to question Michele Bachmann about the debt ceiling on yesterday’s Meet the Press.

Then, consider the way Lois Romano handled this topic in Newsweek’s recent profile of Bachmann.

Quick background: Bachmann has said that she would never raise the debt ceiling, under any circumstance. This must be the most ludicrous position any major White House candidate has ever taken on any budget matter.

But so what! As far as we know, the New York Times has never bothered explaining this matter—and the Washington Post has only deigned to do so once, in a front-page report back on July 15.

Bachmann’s position is utterly ludicrous—but most voters have never heard anyone explain why that’s the case. And then, a guy like Gregory steps in! By the time he was done on yesterday’s program, Bachmann’s position started to sound like it might make good solid sense.

Read more at www.dailyhowler.com

Greetings from London! It’s been a busy and exciting trip—we met the Queen and gave her an ipod, which was pretty cool. She’ll probably use it on the elliptical. And Michelle is on a high—according to a recent Washington Post-ABC News survey, her favorability ratings are up to 76%, and she has made great gains with Republican in particular. We love that--biceps are all for bipartisanship. But she hasn't made inroads with every Republican. In the same Washington Post story, one Maxine Furlong is quoted saying that Michelle has a ways to go before she will be a “great first lady.” The problem, according to Ms. Furlong, is that Michelle has "this black woman's attitude..." Note the ellipsis. The reporter, Lois Romano, freaking left it at that! Hello, Lois? The obvious followup is "What do you mean?" Because 99.9% of us think it means "She's an uppity, angry black lady," and if that is what Maxine Furlong meant, then put it out there, by all means. Don't put an ellipsis in there to cover up the ugliness. It just makes you complicit.

Romano goes on to quote Furlong saying, "White girls have more insecurities, which is why they care more about being ingratiating. I'm not saying this is a bad thing--I like that about her--but she is just a very strong woman and that can come off as condescending." So secure black women who aren't being ingratiating are scary and condescending. Apparently, being a strong woman is a bad thing, at least if you're Michelle Obama. If you are sassy old Barbara Bush, no problem. Remember how people used to say she was secretly pro-choice? Radical!

Michelle's rise in the polls is, we believe, due in part to a necessary and calculated response to the racist and sexist smears that have been directed at her since she came to national attention. Barbara Bush's rumor was that she was secretly pro-choice. Michelle's were that she calls white people honkys and hates America. To counter this, she announced her intention to be the "mom-in-chief" and considerably softened up her image. (Though we must point out that we did not soften up.)

So we greet this poll with mixed feelings. Can Michelle be more than the First Mom? How much soup do we have to dole out before her attitude is considered acceptable? We are getting a little bored here in England, being all covered up and having to change outfits three times a day so that the networks and news outlets can cover Ms. Obama instead of the protests or the summit. People like Maxine Furlong and journalists who fail to call out the truth from them make our view of America a little bleak.