Washington Post media critic Howard Kurtz is pretty surly this morning in writing about the media coverage of the election. After a "if you'd just listened to all-knowing me" he starts in on the obvious course of action for journalists.
Now it is the solemn duty of journalists to cope with all kinds of questions:
What will be the impact on the Democrats' pet legislation? The final two years of the Bush presidency? The 2008 elections? The war in Iraq? Nancy Pelosi? Rahm Emanuel? Denny Hastert? Karl Rove? Hillary? McCain? Obama? The House Republican staffers who will lose their jobs? The playing-to-the-base strategy? The future of democracy? The fate of the civilized world?
Man, there is so much to chew over that we could keep this going for the next month--and undoubtedly will, unless something better comes along, like another gay clergyman sex scandal or something of that ilk.
There's nothing reporters like better than a change in power, because it gives us winners and losers the opportunity to build up some new faces--profile-writers, on your marks!--until we inevitably discover they are flawed human beings and start tearing them down.
My, my, but his cynicism has rocketed to the top of the Washington Monument. Maybe old Howie just needs a vacation. After all, it's really exhausting when you know everything.