There should be very little discussion about the actual presence of a liberal bias in the news media today. Everyone more or less accepts the fact that it exists, and for better or worse, as a product of those who choose a profession that Bob Knight once dubbed as "two or three steps above prostitution." Just like a gifted athelete on a popular sports team who is oftentimes bombastic, tendencies of those in the profession of journalism to lean towards the left is tolerated because it is seen as a byprodcut of their profession itself. Because a journalist's job includes asking questions and demanding accountability, most people, especially Americans, appreciate this bias because it means never accepting exactly what the government tells its populace, thus providing oversight. However, in the year 2007, it is now also painfully obvious that a double standard exists within liberal journalistic circles, and that oversight is not only desperatley lacking, its becoming nigh non-existent. This is not the first time I've decried the unbelievably biased viewpoint most newspapers and mainstream media outlets grant their Liberal comrades, and it shan't be the last.
Earlier this week, Senator Lieberman told the American people that an attack on Iran might prove necessary should they continue to provide weapons and training to terrorists in Iraq and now the Taliban in Afghanistan. The full story is available here:
http://washingtontimes.com/national/20070610-115444-9596r.htm
Where were the protests? Where were the devil signs above Lieberman's head? Why has no one come out to call Lieberman a warmongerer? Did I miss the talking heads on CNN and MSNBC call for the ouster of Lieberman's neo-con agenda? The last time Dick Cheney took the opportunity to suggest Iran be held accountable for supplying weapons and training to violent militias in the Middle East, the John Stewarts of the world took to the air, laughing and ridiculing said "warmongering" all the way to the bank of better TV ratings. The fact of the matter is, Joe Lieberman is right. Because Joe doesn't have the pulsatingly evil R next to his name on the TV grahpic, he is given a complete pass to say what he feels, and thank God he feels the way he does. Iran is getting away with too much meddling in the Middle East, and just because the U.S. Army is operating at maximum capacity doesn't mean the Navy and Air Force are tied down to any commitments. 4 days of Navy and Air Force sorties in the mid 80's sank the entire Iranian surface fleet, and quite frankly such a sight should be welcomed at this point considering the amount of carnage the Iranians have contributed towards our forces in Iraq and Afghanistan as of late.
Well, perhaps this could be nit-picking on my part. It could be that as a disgrungtled conservative, I'm cherry picking insignificant blips on the radar screen of American news. Lieberman is after all, the John McCain of the Democratic Party, and often deviates from party line (despite the fact he is now officially an Independent). I couldn't possibly find another example of the liberal bias in the media completely forgiving one of its own for saying something which would otherwise be considered incorrigible. Well, this might be 5475 days too late, but it certainly isn't a dollar short as far as my money is concerned. Here we have Al Gore discussing Iraq/Saddam Hussein and terror links in 1992, demanding George H.W. Bush do more to confront these nefarious activities.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9JE48XHKG64
While Al is about 50 pounds lighter in this video, the irony is as heavy as ever.
As mentioned earlier, the media in any country should swing slightly to the left. The alternative would merely be a mouthpiece for the government, which inevitably could be used as a method of control over the masses. That said, when leftist elements beging to protect their own interests and involvement within the aforementioned government, well, then it also becomes just another mouthpiece for unfettered bias in the form of social and "progressive" agendas. This is no more evident than what recently took place in Venezuela, where a rival media outlet to that of increasingly ego-maniacal Hugo Chavez was shut down amidst the pleas of the people Mr. Populist himself swore to serve. What this living, breathing lesson should tell us is that left wing fascism is just as dangerous and potent as right wing/nationalistic fascism, and walking the fine line between either is equally treacherous.
Earlier this week, Senator Lieberman told the American people that an attack on Iran might prove necessary should they continue to provide weapons and training to terrorists in Iraq and now the Taliban in Afghanistan. The full story is available here:
http://washingtontimes.com/national/20070610-115444-9596r.htm
Where were the protests? Where were the devil signs above Lieberman's head? Why has no one come out to call Lieberman a warmongerer? Did I miss the talking heads on CNN and MSNBC call for the ouster of Lieberman's neo-con agenda? The last time Dick Cheney took the opportunity to suggest Iran be held accountable for supplying weapons and training to violent militias in the Middle East, the John Stewarts of the world took to the air, laughing and ridiculing said "warmongering" all the way to the bank of better TV ratings. The fact of the matter is, Joe Lieberman is right. Because Joe doesn't have the pulsatingly evil R next to his name on the TV grahpic, he is given a complete pass to say what he feels, and thank God he feels the way he does. Iran is getting away with too much meddling in the Middle East, and just because the U.S. Army is operating at maximum capacity doesn't mean the Navy and Air Force are tied down to any commitments. 4 days of Navy and Air Force sorties in the mid 80's sank the entire Iranian surface fleet, and quite frankly such a sight should be welcomed at this point considering the amount of carnage the Iranians have contributed towards our forces in Iraq and Afghanistan as of late.
Well, perhaps this could be nit-picking on my part. It could be that as a disgrungtled conservative, I'm cherry picking insignificant blips on the radar screen of American news. Lieberman is after all, the John McCain of the Democratic Party, and often deviates from party line (despite the fact he is now officially an Independent). I couldn't possibly find another example of the liberal bias in the media completely forgiving one of its own for saying something which would otherwise be considered incorrigible. Well, this might be 5475 days too late, but it certainly isn't a dollar short as far as my money is concerned. Here we have Al Gore discussing Iraq/Saddam Hussein and terror links in 1992, demanding George H.W. Bush do more to confront these nefarious activities.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9JE48XHKG64
While Al is about 50 pounds lighter in this video, the irony is as heavy as ever.
As mentioned earlier, the media in any country should swing slightly to the left. The alternative would merely be a mouthpiece for the government, which inevitably could be used as a method of control over the masses. That said, when leftist elements beging to protect their own interests and involvement within the aforementioned government, well, then it also becomes just another mouthpiece for unfettered bias in the form of social and "progressive" agendas. This is no more evident than what recently took place in Venezuela, where a rival media outlet to that of increasingly ego-maniacal Hugo Chavez was shut down amidst the pleas of the people Mr. Populist himself swore to serve. What this living, breathing lesson should tell us is that left wing fascism is just as dangerous and potent as right wing/nationalistic fascism, and walking the fine line between either is equally treacherous.
Comments