Eric Boehlert has a fantastic column over at Media Matters examine the stark difference between the press corps’ approach to Bush on one hand, and Obama/Clinton on the other.   The White House press corps – which figuratively (and sometimes literally) didn’t bother showing up during the Bush years – all of a sudden decides that they’re going to demand answers to questions.   And it sure feels a lot like the beginning of the Clinton years.  Boehlert notes:

Can’t say I’m surprised about the sudden change in behavior, though. Taking the long view, I recently went back and contrasted how the press covered the first days and weeks of Clinton’s first term in 1993 with its coverage of Bush’s arrival in 2001. The difference in tone and substance was startling. (Think bare-knuckled vs. cottony soft.)

One explanation at the time of the Bush lovefest was that reporters and pundits were just so burnt out by the Clinton scandal years that they needed some downtime. They needed to relax; it was human nature. Conversely, the opposite now seems to be true: Because the press dozed for so long — because it sleepwalked through the Bush years — it just had to spring back to life with the new administration. It’s human nature.

When contrasting the early Clinton and Bush coverage, I noted it would be deeply suspicious if, in 2009, the press managed to turn up the emotional temperature just in time to cover another Democratic administration. But wouldn’t you know it, the press corps’ alarm went off right on time for Obama’s arrival last week, with the Beltway media taking down off the shelf the dusty set of contentious, in-your-face rules of engagement they practiced during the Clinton years and putting into safe storage the docile, somnambulant guidelines from the Bush era. In other words, one set of rules for Clinton and Obama, another for Bush. One standard for the Democrats; a separate, safer one, for the Republican.

Let’s be clear – I absolutely want an aggressive press corps that will illustrate the gaps between Obama’s rhetoric and action, between Congress pushing their own political interest over our public interest.  But that’s not what we’re going to be getting here, I think we’ll soon see.  Instead, we’re going to see a political press obsessed with petty slights and side issues.  And while they’re flailing away at the White House, there will be nearly no substantive examination of the breathtakingly ignorant talking points pushed by Republicans in Congress.   This isn’t a matter of bias perception on my part – there’s a substantive record to back it up.   What’s the solution?  I really don’t know.  It’s much like the financial industry, I think.  Everyone needs the lie to be true, lest they lose their place.  Perhaps it all needs to come crashing down.

But if it did, how would the country know?