The unasked question

Or at least so far as I’ve seen:

How can you have a fair election when the media is in the tank for one party?

The emerging picture of the Journolist is that it served as a place where like-minded people who had great influence on how the media portrayed events were able to coordinate their story lines for the benefit of the Obama campaign.

We saw the media bias on the surface; the Journolistas helped frame that bias below the surface.

Congress is fond of passing campaign finance reform, but no amount of corporate (or union for that matter) campaign spending can buy the kind of advantage that a media that is a willing participant in one party’s campaign can bring.

I don’t want to shrug my shoulders and say that’s just how things are, but I don’t want to go all, “There ought to be a law” either.

What to do?

This entry was posted in politics, Stupid MSM. Bookmark the permalink.

5 Responses to The unasked question

  1. Weer'd Beard says:

    What we’ve been doing. People don’t read newspapers or news magazines, and now that there are a hojillion Cable and satellite channels, the morning and evening news aren’t the only games in town anymore.

    For those who ARE interested in objective news there are alternative stations, blogs, and papers.

    Honestly what we NEED is to end the cultural practice where its bad not to vote…but somehow a good deed if you blindly cast an uninformed ballot.

    People who don’t follow politics and don’t follow issues should be discouraged from casting a ballot. This goes for both sides. I could care less if a pinko commie person votes for a pinko commie.

    What I don’t like is how gay rights people, and Jews voted in droves for Homophobe anti-Semite Barack Obama. There’s just no excuse for that shit except people voting “Just to vote”

  2. steelghost says:

    They are bullies. There are two ways to deal with these bullies, force them to behave or ignore them. They want attention so when you ignore them and convince more people to ignore them, they will slowly lose the ability to influence anything. This means that every time they do this we need to point it out and provide a more complete set of facts. This may take time, but the more often it is pointed out the sooner they lose. Any use of force makes us the same as them and I refuse to go that low.

    Answering Weerd’s unasked question. I’d like the option of voting “ no confidence” so that I would not have give my vote to someone I hate least.

  3. DirtCrashr says:

    The Double-Standard Party can’t win if they don’t cheat, and they have a big book full of cheating methods.

  4. Newbius says:

    If and when the Restoration happens, Clinton’s Rules of Engagement (a-la Serbia and Bosnia) are in effect. Research the Nuremberg Trials. The intellectuals and elites who supported the Nazis, including the “journalists” of the day, were prosecuted, found guilty, then hung. A fitting end, don’t you think?

    (Note: It is not a violation of Godwin’s Law to quote Nazi history in context)

  5. Jay G. says:

    I’m guessing “shoot the bastards” would be over-the-top, right?

Comments are closed.