![](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgY9Yiv9c7L178SP9c3Nhyphenhyphen5KuVX3T-TO150ejW4B91SdkUawgWYmRjcfWPz8jwhkoNZwzM_ZnkujIX6mxl_Zna-D7Pq8sV14jxivcpAD0CHOxpOvRetbqmY18epxzROXZ9HSeBBJpwUq9LN/s400/thrill+up+my+leg.jpg)
"As Instapundit reader Gordon Stewart, quoted by Reynolds on May 17, put it, "How many times in a row can something happen unexpectedly before the experts start to, you know, expect it? At some point, shouldn't they be required to state the foundation for their expectations?"
"One answer is that many in the mainstream media have been cheerleading for Barack Obama. They and he both naturally hope for a strong economic recovery. After all, Obama can't keep blaming the economic doldrums on George W. Bush forever."
"I'm confident that any comparison of economic coverage in the Bush years and the coverage now would show far fewer variants of the word "unexpectedly" in stories suggesting economic doldrums."
"It's obviously going to be hard to achieve the unacknowledged goal of many mainstream journalists -- the president's re-election -- if the economic slump continues. So they characterize economic setbacks as unexpected, with the implication that there's still every reason to believe that, in Herbert Hoover's phrase, prosperity is just around the corner."
http://washingtonexaminer.com/politics/2011/05/pro-obama-media-always-shocked-bad-economic-news