[ScottSolomon]

The problem is, the news media in the U.S. ( with a couple of exceptions ) have treated George W. Bush with kid gloves on just about every issue. Months of reporting went into Whitewater, the travel office scandals, Gore's "inventing" the internet, etc. All stories that turned out to be fabrications and egregious examples of journalistic malfeasance. If you don't believe me, I suggest you peruse the archives of the Daily Howler - which is an exhaustively documented expose of the level of media manipulation of political discourse in recent years. If you think that Somersby is to objective for you ( or too liberal ) just do the Lexis Nexis searches yourself.

The corporate media has become the voice of the right wing of America, and as The Weekly Standard's Matt Labash admits:

We've created this cottage industry in which it pays to be un-objective. It pays to be subjective as much as possible. It's a great way to have your cake and eat it too. Criticize other people for not being objective. Be as subjective as you want. It's a great little racket. I'm glad we found it actually.

They clearly have no problem passing off spin as objective news. The corporate media, FAUX News, MSNBC, CNN, Washington Times, WSJ, USA Today, etc - have taken a very strong slide to the right -distributing the spin from the Weekly Standard as real, objective, journalism.

This is why Bush is made of Teflon, and Clinton was make of crazy glue. The media started skewering Clinton from the moment he started to run for office, and they continue to skewer the left to this day while they conveniently ignore and distort the actions of the president.

This is why you never heard about Bush's sweetheart deals.

Exactly what "sweetheart deals" are you talking about?

Read Brooks Jackson's article from CNN. Jackson describes Bush's Arbusto Oil - which turned out to be a tax shelter for Bush's family and friends. Then Bush's relatively small investment in the Texas Rangers - and his great connections - convinced Arlington to foot the bill ( and use imminent domain to force eviction of hundreds of families ) for the new Texas Rangers stadium - while Bush and Richard Rainwater collected the revenues. This is the glossed up version for CNN, and it is just the tip of the iceberg.

Dubya's financial relationship with Richard Rainwater during his tenure as Texas governor is a textbook example of Crony Capitalism. Rainwater is a billionaire speculator and money manager who ranks among the wealthiest 100 Americans. It's well known that Rainwater has been a major financial backer of Bush's political career, but it's a little-known fact that he's also largely responsible for Bush's personal wealth.

Rainwater and Bush sold the baseball team to another Texas high roller and Bush campaign contributor, billionaire Tom Hicks. But their relationship didn't stop there. When Bush became Gov in '95, he put all his Texas Rangers stock into a blind trust managed by--surprise--Rainwater.

The financial relationship was not a one way street. Bush is nothing if not loyal to Rainwater, who has done very nicely while his pal has been governor. Among the favors Rainwater has enjoyed:

• State buildings sold to Rainwater's real estate company at bargain basement rates;
• State college and public school funds invested in Rainwater's company;
• A Bush-sponsored tax cut that failed, but would have cut millions in annual taxes for Rainwater;
• A stadium-financing bill backed by Bush that gave a $10 million bonus payment to a Rainwater company. This arena also enhanced the worth of Thomas Hicks' hockey team. In the six months after that bill was signed, Bush's political fund received $37,000 from Hicks, $11,000 from Rainwater Owned Crescent Investment's President Haddock and $5,000 from Ross Perot, Jr. Both Ross Perot Jr. and Crescent are major investors in the Dallas Mavericks Basketball team.

But that is still just a tiny sliver. Once Bush became governor, he appointed Tom Hicks chairman of The University of Texas Investment Management Co (UTIMCO) which manages the 1.7 billion dollar University Permanent Fund. Hicks invested one third of the money in funds run by Hicks' business associates or friends along with five funds run by major Republican political donors. Hicks has been secretive about where any of the funds have gone - and state auditors have criticized the board for conflicts of interest, but pressure from above put a halt to the investigation.

When Bush first got into office, he also pressured the University of Texas Board of Regents to place millions of state dollars into the Carlyle Group - even though Bush had just quit his job as a corporate director of Carlyle-owned Caterair to pursue a gubernatorial candidacy.

During Bush's first term as governor of Texas he had an active and ongoing relationship with Hicks and Rainwater to the advantage of all three men. Bush has used his power for the benefit of other friends, too.

When funeral home chain SCI (donated $35,000 to Bush campaign ) was cited by the Texas Funeral Services commission for using unlicensed embalmers, Bush's top aide, Joe Allbaugh met with Robert Waltrip ( SCI's CEO ) and shortly thereafter the funeral home regulator that made the charges against SCI was fired and blacklisted. Not long after the investigation began, Waltrip called the regulator's boss and demanded that he 'back off.' If not, funeral commission chairman Charles McNeil recalls Waltrip telling him, 'I'm going to take this to the governor.' Eliza May, the regulator, filed a lawsuit against Bush, Allbaugh, and Waltrip. The defendants ended up settling out of court for $210,000.

This is just a small sample of the stuff that has been reported in the corporate press. If this does not make Bush look like an insider politician making deals for his buddies, I don;t know what does.

But hell, they are doing the same thing for Halliburton, Bechtel, and Worldcom - right this very minute. I know it may be hard to ask for honesty from a politician, but it is wrong to use government power for the benefit of your friends and former employers. I can't understand why we are supposed to accept this blatant confluence of government power and corporate interests.