Guest hosting for Bill Bennett earlier today, Michael Steele said the following:

The problem that we have with this president is that we don’t know [Obama]. He was not vetted, folks. … He was not vetted, because the press fell in love with the black man running for the office. “Oh gee, wouldn’t it be neat to do that? Gee, wouldn’t it make all of our liberal guilt just go away? We can continue to ride around in our limousines and feel so lucky to live in an America with a black president.” Okay that’s wonderful, great scenario, nice backdrop. But what does he stand for? What does he believe? … So we don’t know. We just don’t know.

Apparently, we're supposed to be Shocked! and Outraged! by him stating something that is correct to a good extent. At least, that's what Ali Frick of ThinkProgress wants us to think (link). Except, as could be expected from that source, all he can do is engage in a logical fallacy by saying it's "striking" that Steele would say such a thing after some sources said that same thing about him. Frick fails to address Steele's argument by, for instance, providing examples of the mainstream media vetting Barack Obama. To deny that they gave Obama a pass with almost everything he said during the campaign is to deny reallity. Not all of that was due to his race; part was due to the fact that he was a Democrat. However, there were several people highlighting how electing a black president would per se be good thing for the U.S.

And, what starts at the leftwing, George Soros-funded ThinkProgress trickles down to lying hack Ben Smith at the Politico who links to their post at "Your Friday Steele" [1], saying:

What happens on Fridays: Michael Steele guest hosts Bill Bennett's radio show; young staffers at Media Matters and the Center for American Progress listen and compete for the most entertaining sound byte.

And, it's a regular hackfest as Marc Ambinder of The Atlantic raises issues with Steele's "civility" [2] then says:

I still know a few Clinton advisers who would, in their heart of hearts, agree with this.

In other words, he's more interested in being political correct and not telling the truth then looking into how and why the mainstream media completely failed to vet Obama.

[1] politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0509/Your_Friday_Steele.html
[2] politics.theatlantic.com/2009/05/a_lesson_in_civility_from_michael_steele.php