Bush's fundraising troubles

This is rich:

President Bush (news - web sites)'s campaign — expected to dwarf Democratic hopefuls by raising $200 million or more for the primaries, with no GOP rival — is appealing for donations by portraying Bush as a fund-raising underdog who won't have enough cash to defend himself against Democratic attacks. "Democrats and their allies will have more money to spend attacking the president during the nomination battle than we will have to defend him," campaign chairman Marc Racicot wrote in the fund-raising e-mail sent Wednesday night. "If you need more convincing the president needs your help, consider what the Democrats are saying. The race is just starting, but their rhetoric is already red-hot."

But why shouldn't the GOP think they can get away with a blatant lie like this? After all, during the 2000 debates Bush blurted out that Gore was spending more money than him, an obvious falsehood, but did the establishment media call him on it? No! They chose instead to go after Gore because he used the incorrect verb tense when talking about a Florida student having to stand in her classroom. The thinking in the press is basically that Bush is a stumble-bum when it comes to speaking so they shouldn't get to hot under the caller if he makeasininene comments like "He's outspending me!" The result is that these comments are allowed to pass into the American sub-conscious and people begin to believe it. After all, if it wasn't true the press would call him on it? Right? Right?