Monday, August 18, 2008

Finally!

A congratulations is due to Rick Davis. For those of you who don’t know, Rick Davis is the campaign manager for John McCain. Mr. Davis has finally articulated what all of us in the right-thinking free world have known for a long time: The main stream press has shown a gross bias towards Democratic Presumptive Nominee Barack Obama.

The facts support this. Just a few weeks ago, two major networks sent their evening news anchors to the Middle East to follow Obama on his trip there. More damning is the following statistic: McCain receives one third of the news coverage that Obama receives (according to the ultra-right wing Washington Post). With stunts like this, it is not hard to figure out who the media likes.

Not that anyone should be surprised by this reality. The fact that the mainstream media has disfavored conservative candidates is not new, and is certainly not a state secret. At the same time it does clearly seem that with the coverage of the Obama campaign, people like Katie Couric (CBS) and Andrea Mitchell (NBC) have sunk to new lows in their reporting.

This brings us to the act undertaken by Mr. Davis that is so worthy of our praise. In a letter dated August 17, 2008, Mr. Davis directly questions the quality of NBC’s reporting after Andrea Mitchell’s grossly biased comments on this past Sunday’s edition of Meet the Press. While the letter falls short of the real lambasting NBC and others deserve for their failures as journalists, it is a legitimate shot back at an institution that has locked out and stymied conservative candidates for years.

It is highly unlikely that Mr. Davis’s efforts will yield any actual tangible results. So long as media favorite nut jobs like Nancy Pelosi are hailing Barack Obama as a “blessing from God sent to us all,” the media will continue to regurgitate such garbage. Regardless, at last someone in a position to make a difference is actually trying to turn the volume down on the “Obama-is-the-Messiah” hysteria that is sweeping every naive mind in the nation.

By U.S. Grant

4 comments:

Chicago77 said...

"More damning is the following statistic: McCain receives one third of the news coverage that Obama receives (according to the ultra-right wing Washington Post). With stunts like this, it is not hard to figure out who the media likes."

Ultra-right wing Washington Post? Is this sarcasm? WP is the beacon of liberal Newspapers.
Furthermore, some would argue that Senator McCain's lack of media coverage has been benificial to him because he is able to slide under the radar. Senator Obama's viewpoints have been meticulously scrutinized by the litany of media attention he has been gettnig. Regardless of whom the so called "liberal media" prefers, your argument is moot.

W. Sherman said...

"Senator Obama's viewpoints have been meticulously scrutinized by the litany of media attention he has been getting."

Meticulously scrutinized? I don't think so... I would call it blind acceptance by his cheerleaders in the mainstream media.

Ed Poe said...

The difference in media coverage and its effects is somewhat of a mixed bag. In the "liberal media", otherwise just known as "the media", the fawning adulations that have been heaped upon Obama may be having an opposite effect than what was intended. In short, when there is nothing new to write about except how lovely Obama's voice sounds, people are starting to get sick of hearing about it. In this manner, the lopsided media attention is helping McCain. However, where the bias clearly hurts McCain is highlighting the negatives, the gaffes, and the weaknesses. McCain's ineloquent retort about housing will get a great amount of coverage, but you will not find equal coverage regarding Obama's Rezko connection, Biden's MBNA dealings, etc.

If Obama's "viewpoints" have been "meticulously scrutinized" by the media it simply is because there have no new viewpoints offered. In order for their to be scrutiny, there must be substance.

ed poe said...

Another thought on media coverage. It would be interesting to run a tally during the Dem convention on the number of "negative" articles that run on sites such as CNN and then do the same tally during the GOP convention. I'll wager a guess there will not be ONE day during the GOP convention that there will not be some negative articles, or highly critical paragraphs peppered into the analysis of McCain's "week."