My take on the election
Published on -12/10/2012, 10:23 AM
My take on the election
Republicans are undergoing psychoanalysis trying to figure out why the party lost the November election to an incumbent president with an abysmal record. Apparently, there are a whole host of reasons. Space in Reader Forum doesn't permit addressing all of them, so I will write about one in particular.
Let me start with a question. Can somebody (anybody) explain how it is possible to have a level playing field (three of Obama's favorite words) in media when 80 percent of today's reporters contribute to Democrats and vote Democrat?
The other day, I was reading "our soldiers put their lives on the line so we can be a free country and that includes a free press." Pardon me for being explicit but it seems to me far too many reporters are, figuratively speaking, spitting on the graves of those great Americans who died for a great cause.
Obama owns mainstream media. They carry his water. Some reporters clear with the White House before publishing their stories. The pure unadulterated lack of objectivity is startling. Media Research Center clearly proves that the positive to negative stories about Democrats versus Republicans is a lopsided affair.
The propaganda of Obamists has to change if we ever expect to be a free country moving forward.
No, the following in and of itself, didn't cause Romney to tank in November, but it was a huge contributing factor. Democrats, with the help of media, called Republicans racist, bigots, homophobes, have an ongoing war with women, only for the rich, etcetera. No matter how much proof is provided to the contrary, the left can say anything and not be challenged by mainstream media.
How many voters believed Romney, through Bain Capital, let a woman die of cancer? Romney is a felon? Romney hasn't paid taxes for years according to Harry Reid? Did media call out the Obamists who lied? Of course not.
Media was, and still is, complicit in that it's all Bush's fault. Media wouldn't dream of faulting a Democrat controlled Congress in the last two year's of Bush's administration or the fact Dems have pretty much controlled Congress since 2007. Media blames Bush for no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq when Democrats voted to go to war and virtually all Democrats said for years before the vote Saddam Hussein needs to go due to those weapons. The Iraq war was only 4 percent of Bush's expenditures but media would lead all of us to believe it's primarily responsible for our national debt. The media says nothing about the cost of Obama's war in Afghanistan.
Media was absolutely brutal and unrelenting during Bush's Katrina and, in some ways, Obama's Sandy is worse, but little is said about how the present administration handles the aftermath of the current natural catastrophe on the east coast.
The whole point being (and I could go on and on and on with one illustration after another) there is no level playing field with media in today's politics. Reporters are, for the most part liberal, and they're going to favor big time that ideology in their stories. The campaign from the left (that includes media) was all about racism, class warfare, contraceptives and the like, while the really important things like the economy and job creation were ignored.
Obama's chain gang of leftist media reporters consider speaking truth to power as an abstraction, and distraction.
Who's the biggest loser in all of this? No, it's not Republicans. It's the American people. It's you and me.
Victoria and Gilbert, Ariz.