Barack Obama: Recalling the Wild Praise of 2008

I'm not going to remark on this but will just quote from it. A Washington Post editorial of October 16, 2008, endorsing a presidential candidate:

"Mr. Obama is a man of supple intelligence, with a nuanced grasp of complex issues and evident skill at conciliation and consensus-building. At home, we believe, he would respond to the economic crisis with a healthy respect for markets tempered by justified dismay over rising inequality and an understanding of the need for focused regulation. Abroad, the best evidence suggests that he would seek to maintain U.S. leadership and engagement, continue the fight against terrorists, and wage vigorous diplomacy on behalf of U.S. values and interests. Mr. Obama has the potential to become a great president. Given the enormous problems he would confront from his first day in office, and the damage wrought over the past eight years, we would settle for very good."

OK, I can't resist asking a question:

What would you settle for now?

How about: "Mr. Obama has the potential to become better than Jimmy Carter and George W. Bush if he's lucky....We would settle for not catastrophic."

On the other hand, if necessary, the Post can recycle other parts of this editorial in its future edition of October 16, 2016, referring to the newly elected next president:

"Given the enormous problems he would confront from his first day in office, and the damage wrought over the past eight years...

If the United States can enforce a no-fly zone in Libya, is it too much to hope that the American mass media make at least some attempt to invoke a no-lie zone in its own country?