Dale,
In re your statement, "by all the *&^(ing incumbent professional politicians"
I believe that is spelled, "@#$%ing".
Interesting posts these days as our markets stay high and regroup for another surge at Dow 10,000 and SPX 1100. Baseball and newspapers.
Concerning the corrupt and ultimately corruptible "free" press, it's easy to understand their liberal bent: liberalism always "sounds" better, more humane, sweeter, than conservatism. Just as liberal parenting sounded better ("we try to raise our children in a non-hierarchical, non-judgmental, free spirited environment, without oppressive conformistic rules--two children are in rehab and the third is on his fourth major and 8th year at the state university") than conservative parenting ("rules, few, but strict, punishments, few but strict, constancy, constancy, constancy, and responsibility"), but it is the conservative parenting that produces diligent and productive students. Just look at Asian families. Oh well. Also, from a financial demographic point of view it's easy to understand that a newsroom might not be as conservative as a real estate brokers' office or the Chamber of Commerce. Mostly staffed by graduates of liberal arts curricula, thoroughly indoctrinated by Marxist style theories of thought ("critical determinism," dialectical whatever, yada yada yada) and social criticism, and earning little more than poverty style wages, living in rental units (owned by the arch-demons, capitalists)--of course these people vote Democrat and Ralph Nader. Any other outcome would be surprising. And of course it colors the subjects they choose to report on and how they report on them. Story on Gray Davis? Show him in the candlelight with Latinos looking like Saint Gray. Story on drilling in the godforsaken permafrosted ANWAR? Let's use a photo of a Polar bear cub. Story on Arnold? Let's hide a nothing story on "groping" (I wonder how many times Arnold has been groped by women??) until the Friday before the election and then publish it as "reportage."
Biggest expose in the LA Times is the LA Times itself.
What's most interesting is that today people who object to the editorial slant of the NYT and the LA Times can vote with their pocketbooks not to take the paper. We have so many alternative sources of news and commentary, why would you pay a nickel to support things like those two newspapers or the incredibly slanted Public Broadcasting Corporation?
I do believe we are still in a bull rally here,
Kb |
