Media Bias: Palin vs Obama

The media is up in arms about Palin's latest speech where she jots 4 words down on her hand to use as notes for a speech. People in the media, like Andrea Mitchell are calling it cheating, and hypocritical because Palin has often criticized Obama's use of the teleprompter.

I don't understand the comparison. To equate one with the other is either bad judgement or bad journalism, or both and it's difficult to see the comparison between the two. One is just reading, pure and simple, nothing more; whereas the other one is a real speech, with just a few words to help someone remember key points. One can argue about the content of what one is reading (or was written for them) compared to what the other is speaking (in their own words). One might also find it funny that she wrote it on her hand rather than put it on a cue card - this can certainly be debated. But in my humble opinion, there really is no comparison between reading, which most 7 year-olds can do, and actually delivering a speech.

Now, I don't know Andrea Mitchell very well. Maybe Mitchell holds Obama to a lower standard and so for him, reading a speech in it's entirety is the same as using a couple of words on a note card. Does Mitchell hold some people to a higher standard than others? Maybe she holds conservatives, or even people of different genders, or races to different standards. I'm not sure what her personal biases are, but the comparison is ridiculous and I can't see any other reason how she could equate one with the other.

Everyone knows that a few notes are acceptable in the course of a speech, but reading the entire speech is usually only considered acceptable for beginners, and probably not for a President of the United States, and certainly not for someone labelled by the left as THE GREAT COMMUNICATOR.