Howard Kurtz does an admirable job in today’s Washington Post listing examples of the over-the-top media fawning over the President-elect, which he suggests has clearly crossed the line away from objective journalism. Yet he avoids actually talking about what this does to media credibility and indeed to the health of the public debate when the press is so entirely in the tank for a politician. Can we really expect the mainstream media to properly vet Obama’s appointments or to dissect his policy proposals? And Kurtz ignores the media treatment of Obama before he was elected – which was just as embarrassingly cheerleading and lopsided as it has been since he was elected. Is this really healthy for our democracy? Kurtz assures readers that eventually journalists will get back to business, but I don’t know why we should believe him or why we should bother trusting what those so-called journalists write in the future.