Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="audioholic" data-source="post: 6246791" data-attributes="member: 549629">When you are liberally biased, Im confident Fox News does seem like the station that started it all. And yet, the only reason Fox News gained so much exposure and popularity so fast was due to the amazing left-wing biased of virtually every other major news organization in this country. The idea that the media in this country was heavily left-biased existed long before Fox News came on the scene. The unfortunate part is they have let themselves become just as biased as a CNN, but only in the opposite direction.Who cares if they plaster red, white and blue all over the screen. Its how they report the news, what they chose to report, and what they chose to not report that is important. They could plaster Soviet China colors all over the screen for all I care, so long as they would try harder to truly be 'fair and balanced'.Ive often felt a big part of the problem is the media's inability to recognize their own bias, in either direction. New organizations are biased, and always will be, because they are controlled by human beings. The sooner we get away from these organizations trying to fool us into thinking they are unbiased, and simply being honest that they are indeed a liberal-biased organization, or a conservative-biased one, the sooner we could start sifting through what is fact, and what is opinion. Most news shows and papaers would tell you they work very hard to remain neutral, yet Im sure we all know this is untrue, and in fact, impossible. So when your entire philosophy is based on a lie, what can you expect to trickle down from it in the form of 10-second news bytes?If an extra marital affair didn't affect Clinton's ability to do his job, why should this same situation so greatly affect Sanford's ability? Its interesting that liberals are now blaming conservatives (his base) for the man's downfall as a viable candidate. Personally I think Sanford should not be considered, but then, imo our pres getting a hummer in the oval office was grounds for stepping down as well. In a country with more than 250 million people, we cant find a single honest person who will keep his dick (or her vag) in their pants for 4-8 years for the sake of the country's well being? Yes, we can. Those people just dont exist in the system we call being a professional politician.The founding fathers set up a system that was run for the people, by the people. A congressman or senator was envisioned as being a local banker, farmer or doctor, whom takes a few years off from his career to serve in the government. Now, if a politician losses his position, that IS his career going down the tubes. That alone leads to very fundamental issues with credibility, honestly and personal gain, at the very heart of our most important and trusted government positions. There's a good reason the founding fathers didn't set up a system that encouraged life-long careers in the government. But somewhere along the way we forgot that, and it has been kept from our eyes by people with vast political careers hanging in the balance.I remember when everyone use to tell lawyer jokes. Like the one about what do you call a 1000 lawyers at the bottom of the ocean... except now lawyers think to themselves 'it could be worse, I could be a politician'. Even the very word politician has taken on a meaning that is frowned upon and not trusted. There is something fundamentally wrong with this.</blockquote>

Verification

Top

What's new

Forum list