So you are supporting her because history says she must be good, and she lost an election. Again I don't know that she so much rooted out corruption as exchanged it. I guess it comes down to her experience as mayor and then gov. of Alaska for you?
I did address her deficits in another thread. She inherited a growing town with an infrastructure and services upgrade. I know my town usually pays for capital improvements with bond money, so I would let the citizens of Wasilla judge that. I think the "libera media bias" is overrated and mostly a self-fulfilling claim. Most journalists personally lean left, that's a given. Studies have been done that show that even conservative media like the Washington Times and Fox News hire more Democrats than Republicans. But virtually all that I meet try to report fairly. That's not to say that the media isn't biased, but it's generally biased toward the politicians who give them the most access, like McCain. The early bias toward Obama from the media was disconcerting (Anderson Cooper ended up saying that he was ashamed of the poor job that they did.), but that hurt Clinton more than it hurt McCain, and may have had no effect. Generally, though, conservatives think that the liberal media is out to get them, so they don't give them as much access as liberals do, so liberals get better coverage. I completely agree with you about the war coverage, and it speaks to what I think the real problem with the media. They spend little time in investigative reporting, and lots of time on news production. The bloggers have picked up the ball on investigative reporting, albeit with no quality control, but televisin news is left really sensationalized.
the media bias of obama has more to do with his charisma than anything else. to argue that its liberal bias that gave him more coverage over clinton is just not accurate when hillary clinton is one of the biggest liberals in this country.
Man, I miss Tim Russert. With him, there would be no question that both sides would get the same fair treatment. Tough questions on the issues. I'm not saying Brokaw won't attempt to do the same (and I didn't see the interview yesterday), but no one did it like Russert.
The media isn't liberal biased, it's intelligence biased. Most members of the media are highly educated, rigorously trained in journalistic ethics and go into the profession in the first place, out of a sense of duty to report the truth. It certainly isn't for the money. But it's getting harder and harder to be unbiased as the outlets of journalism get more and more dependent on profitablility. So, how would a liberal bias draw more advertising from corporate sponsors? If you give soldiers your unquestioning support you should give the media the benefit of the doubt because our freedoms absolutely depend on the integrity of the fourth estate. There is no democracy without a free press.
