Yesterday's Janet Mefferd program featured a truly idiotic interview with the Media Research Center's Brent Bozell about his new book "Collusion: How the Media Stole the 2012 Election---and How to Stop Them from Doing It in 2016," the premise of which seems to be that there were a variety of negative stories about Mitt Romney but none about President Obama.
Apparently, if the media had just dedicated more coverage to the fact that Obama smoked pot as a youth and ate dog as a child while living in Indonesia, Romney would be president today:
Mefferd: You're not allowed to touch those on the left; you're not allowed to dig into the past of Barack Obama and expose what little was exposed before 2008. And it just ramped up, didn't it?
Bozell: You just pitched me a softball. What about the past? How should somebody's past be covered? Well, we know about Mitt Romney, we know that because the Washington Post spent five thousand four hundred words of this, we know that had a dog on his roof. Everyone knows that story. Now why do we all know that story? Because it was reported endlessly because dogs on a roof are important to report.
Well, if dogs on a roof are important, what about dogs in your stomach? What about eating dogs? Is that important? Now, am I making a false accusation or a nefarious accusation about Barack Obama? No, I'm quoting him in his own book. He had said how he ate dog. How is that not newsworthy but leaving a dog on a roof is?
The Washington Post; five thousand four hundred words devoted to an essay on Mitt Romney's youth and it all revolves around, remember, the haircut in 1965? We had to know that. So that's the microcosm of Mitt Romney's youth.
They then did a five thousand word essay on Obama's youth, and it's all about his love for basketball. He had a love for something else, Janet. It was called marijuana. He was a pothead. He was a member of the Choom Gang. What they did was they'd get stoned all the time. Is Brent making an outrageous accusation? No, it's right in Barack Obama's book.
