Obama's Hell Week: Observe the Difference Between The New York Times and The Washington Post

Note the difference this morning between the responses of the columnists of The New York Times and those of The Washington Post to the Benghazi assault, the targeting of conservative groups by the IRS, and the Department of Justice’s secret monitoring of Associated Press journalists.

At The Times, I'm led to wonder if Gail Collins and Charles Blow are on psychotropics. Without delving into any substance whatsoever, Collins makes light of it all and informs us "this too shall pass" (see: http://jgcaesarea.blogspot.co.il/2013/05/gail-collins-on-plus-side-is-she-on.html). Blow, on the other hand, would characterize Obama's headaches as "procedural" and "perceptual" (see: http://jgcaesarea.blogspot.co.il/2013/05/charles-blow-scandalous-vs-scandal-lust.html).

On the other hand, at WaPo, an entirely different picture emerges from both left, right and middle-of-the-road. E.J. Dionne Jr. would have us know (http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/ej-dionne-the-false-god-of-narrative/2013/05/15/2837314a-bd92-11e2-97d4-a479289a31f9_story.html?hpid=z2):

"[W]hat spells trouble for our country is our apparent eagerness to avoid debate about discrete problems by sacrificing the particulars and the facts to the idol of political narrative. It’s a false god."

Dana Milbank tells us (http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/dana-milbank-eric-holders-abdication/2013/05/15/61a42d12-bdaf-11e2-97d4-a479289a31f9_story.html?hpid=z2):

"As the nation’s top law enforcement official, Eric Holder is privy to all kinds of sensitive information. But he seems to be proud of how little he knows.

. . . .

But when the Justice Department undermines the Constitution, recusal is no excuse."

Michael Gerson says (http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/michael-gerson-governments-heavy-hand-felt-in-irs-ap-scandals/2013/05/15/408446c8-bda3-11e2-97d4-a479289a31f9_story.html?hpid=z2):

"Now comes the added blow of scandal. In each recent case, government used power in ways that were insular, highly politicized and intimidating. And however individual responsibility is eventually assigned, these attributes are not aberrations in the Obama era. The administration tends to view its actions as above scrutiny and its opponents as beneath contempt."

David Ignatius states (http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/david-ignatius-in-irs-and-ap-scandals-a-dysfunctional-government/2013/05/15/137ba9de-bd92-11e2-9b09-1638acc3942e_story.html?hpid=z3):

"The crippling problem in Washington these days isn’t any organized conspiracy against conservatives, journalists or anyone else. Rather, it’s a federal establishment that’s increasingly paralyzed because of poor management and political second-guessing.

What should frighten the public is not the federal government’s monstrous power but its impotence."

Tell me, is it remotely possible that the columnists of The Times and The Washington Post are writing about the same set of facts?