Michelle Malkin has a great take-down of a NYT week end magazine article about Valerie Jarrett, pointing out all of the things the Times conveniently omitted from the its glowing review of this important behind-the-scenes player in the Obama White House.
I actually saw the same story on-line last week and blogged about it at the time:
Read this and, aside from hearing effusive praise for Valerie Jarrett, the President’s consigliere, you also learn so much about Obama. Just on the first page, you learn that he’s whiny, bad-tempered, lazy, ill-informed, stubborn, a loose cannon, and, when it comes to strong women, submissive. (Oh, gee, just the qualities I want in my president.) It’s strange when a loving NY Times article sounds as mean as a less than loving National Review article. Jarrett’s power is a bit creepy, especially given that she is a true Chicago political insider (and that’s no compliment). But what makes the article really amazing is the way in which it demeans Obama as a way of highlighting Jarrett’s behind-the-scenes control. As for Jarrett, she bears further examination, given her control over the President.
I’m delighted to see that Michelle has done precisely the “further examination” I thought so necessary. It’s just a shame that most New York Times readers will never learn (or want to learn) the whole story.