We trusted the media to be impartial, we get favoritism. We hoped the media would allow us to interpret the news, instead we get their perspective. The media and its propensity to prop up the Democratic Party has taken to new heights. Britain's latest election was a the latest example of the left propping up their numbers in order to convince the "average" voter. That if all those people are voting labour, well, they can't all be wrong, right? I believe David Cameron's Tory party won enough seats to govern without having to give concessions to members of a coalition for the first time since 92,. Yes, the liberal left fundamentally believes that we the people are bound by incompetence, so therefore we must adhere to there more decorous life decisions. News anchors in England were so bemused by the numbers, one even promised to eat his own hat on live t.v. Comical, really, but the people showed them, they don't have nearly as much say as they thought.
The establishment believes their money will make them the kingmakers during the nomination process (primaries). I pray it will be the struggling, hard working, average American having a larger say during these primaries.
There is no better example of media bias, than the difference between the treatment of Dr. Carson and Mrs Clinton. When Dr. Carson announced his candidacy, the media excoriated him. He's never held public office- he's to conservative-he's out of touch-never been a politician. Some questions have grounds to be asked, but these questions are predominately levied on republican candidates.
It was only until after Bills presidency that Mrs. Clinton first held public office. Senator as a first gig, not bad, and of course chose the infamous (carpet bagger) state of New York. As senator she voted for probably the most controversial bill of the decade, the authorization for bush to go to war with Iraq. A decision I believe was the biggest factor in her losing the nomination in 08. Her only notable achievement as Secretary of State was flying a million miles. I guess she forgot the definition of diplomacy, to actually engage in direct dialect to find common ground.
The media seems to believe they are the sole decider on a candidates electability. They fear the people choosing for themselves, and that is why day in, day out, they will brandish their democratic candidate a savior, a leader....oh and let's not forget America needs a women president. The same media that advises us not to judge people based on gender or skin color, yet advocates on the premise of Americas first female president. The hypocrisy is palpable, almost laughable, their narrative changing daily in order to shield their preferred candidate from critique. Only the media will try to convince you that a brain surgeon, better yet the head neurosurgeon at John Hopkins, couldn't possibly comprehend foreign policy. Their assertions have become jokes, the mainstream media holds no favor with the people in 2015.
Free press has become opinionated press, inundated with the writers views throughout his or hers storytelling. Naturally, the media will tell tales of wars on women, of republican radicalism. They will show polls with their darling democratic candidate leading, sometimes handsomely. They will have you and I believe that our one little vote will mean nothing, because their Hilary's lead has become insurmountable.
The people have suffered greatly under big government, very left of center policies. They don't mention that Baltimore hasn't seen a republican in decades. They don't mention that no nation has ever survived consistently spending more than they take in. Whatever agenda the media plans for 2016, I believe the outcome will be very different.