The Networks Are Bleeding Bias

If you listen to the national media, critiquing itself, they claim that they are fair, with absolutely no bias towards any political party or any specific candidate. But, the people on the right have known this to be one of the great lies by the 4th Estate. They are "totally" biased toward the Democrats and NBC is certainly the worst. In fact, NBC's real mascot should be the Democratic Party's red, white and blue Donkey and not that prissy little "Peacock" they would have you believe is their "real" symbol.

So, it is no wonder that each of the three national television networks will be joining Barack Obama, with the highest levels of news personnel available on his photo-op junket to Iraq and other parts of the world. That's right, the big "guns" of Charlie Gibson, Katie Couric, and Brian Williams have all been figuratively attached to Barack Obama's hips as they report, nightly, on his trip to Iraq and other far points (See Full Story). This symbiotic relationship is absolutely designed to get their man, Barack Obama, elected; the person with whom their own ideologies is the best match.

When McCain went overseas, I think NBC "sent" one of the "janitors" from the NBC headquarters building at Rockefeller Center to accompany him on his trip. That's about as "high level" as things got. I have to laugh when the Democrats talk about re-establishing the "Fairness Doctrine" (See a recent blog entry of mine) to keep a media "balance" on our radio and television airways.

Obama has been "flopping around" on his military withdrawal plans from Iraq like a carp out of water and the "Big Three Networks" have failed to provide any true judgmental reporting on this. Now he's on his way to Iraq and they are going to make damn well sure that he looks "Commander-in-Chief-ee" to all their network viewers. To me this is similar to what the media did to get Jimmy Carter into office; another Democrat who never had the credentials to be President. Author Lawrence H. Shoup wrote in his book titled The Carter Presidency and Beyond:

"What Carter had that his opponents did not was the acceptance and support of elite sectors of the mass communications media. It was their favorable coverage of Carter and his campaign that gave him an edge, propelling him rocket-like to the top of the opinion polls. This helped Carter win key primary election victories, enabling him to rise from an obscure public figure to President-elect in the short space of 9 months..."

Carter's election was one that was "manufactured" (primarily) by a favorable media and whose own ideology was duty-bound to get a far-left and progressive Democrat elected President after the "questionable" years of Nixon/Ford. In that election, Carter got all the favorable press and his opponents were shunned; just as Hillary Clinton was shunned during the primaries and John McCain is getting the cold shoulder now. The National Media didn't get it right then; and they aren't going do what is right, now. Mark my words!

Note: The national network's even "appear" to be fudging their polls to make it look like Obama has a bigger lead than he probably has. Often, the CBS/New York Times or NBC/Wall Street Journal or ABC/Washington Post polls will have Obama leading McCain by more that 6 points. This is despite the fact that the two daily tracking polls generally have Obama only leading by no more than the margin of error: about 3 points.

Image by wallyg's photostream on Flickr with Creative Commons Licensing (Click to View Other Works)