March 28, 2006
Opinion As News: Liberal Media Elitists Keep Sticking It To The Man
Lee P. Butler
Media elitists just can’t seem to go ‘cold turkey’ and break free from their seemingly relentless need
to pass off liberal journalistic attacks on Republicans, specifically President Bush, as news reports.
More and more
recently these attacks that used to never be questioned and had become a part of news rooms daily exercises across America
and was accepted as ‘unbiased’ normal reporting, have been revealed for the partisan journalism they are.
seems to have become a weekly endeavor for news publications such as The New York Times, The Los Angeles Times, Newsweek,
Time Magazine, The Associated Press and so on to print retractions, clarifications or even openly admit that on some level
inaccurate, one-sided and even blatantly false news reports have been produced and published by these institutions that were
neither news or in some cases, weren’t even based on reality.
Yet while many of these institutions have been
almost forced to remove individuals from employment for these misdeeds, they continue to remain reluctant to accept the reality
that this is the number one reason they are steadily losing favor with the American public... of course foreign countries
still love them, because bashing America is a sport in many countries.
At some point it would seem logical that members
of the media who are supposed to have their fingers on the pulse of the country, would realize that to maintain viability
they need average hard working middle-class Americans as participants who consume their product.
But they seem hell
bent on catering to the high-class elitists of the major cities in the country who are only enraptured with the regurgitated
pabulum of liberal snobs who dominate high society and sip the recalcitrant liberal liqueur spewed from the likes of New York
Times columnist Maureen Dowd.
Why else would news associations like the Associated Press continue to publish opinion
pieces produced by reporters in the guise of ‘news reports’ or ‘news analysis’ (which in and of itself
in the mainstream media is nothing more than opinionated news) from reporters who obviously espouse to one day be another
Dowd, such as Jennifer Loven.
She has produced several attack pieces on President Bush and Republicans in recent weeks
that have little to do with facts based on research for analysis and more to do with repeating liberal talking points.
of her more recent MoveOn.org supported hit pieces was focused on what she termed ‘straw men’ arguments created
by President Bush to use during speeches and press conferences to validate his positions while mischaracterizing the positions
of others, specifically Democrats.
“When the president starts a sentence with ‘some say’ or offers
up what ‘some in Washington’ believe,” she wrote, “A rhetorical retort almost assuredly follows. The
device usually is code for Democrats or other White House opponents. In describing what they advocate, Bush often omits an
important nuance or substitutes an extreme stance that bears little resemblance to their actual position. He typically then
says he ‘strongly disagrees’ — conveniently knocking down a straw man of his own making.”
truly troubling about her hit piece that was passed off as ‘news analysis’, is that anybody with enough verve
and basic access to an internet connection could easily do their own research and quickly prove that the examples used in
her opinion column were themselves inaccurately portrayed.
She quotes Wayne Fields of Washington University in St.
Louis on the subject who said it was, "a bizarre kind of double talk" that abuses the rules of legitimate discussion,”
but he admits all politicians use it, he just thinks the President’s administration does so excessively.
springboards Loven into a full bore assault, “Bush has caricatured the other side for years, trying to tilt legislative
debates in his favor or score election-season points with voters.”
That is in no way an analytical point of reference,
but a direct attempt to impugn the integrity of the President. Period.
Yet as she tries to justify her position, she
presents ‘straw men’ arguments of her own.
Here is a perfect example of this: “Running for re-election
against Sen. John Kerry in 2004, Bush frequently used some version of this line to paint his Democratic opponent as weaker
in the fight against terrorism: "My opponent and others believe this matter is a matter of intelligence and law enforcement."”
asserted that since Republican back-stabber Senator John McCain thought it was a ‘mischaracterization’, he had
confirmed her own ‘straw man’ argument.
But a quote from Senator John Kerry himself during the 2004 election
campaign proves differently. “But it's [the War on Terror or the fight against terrorism] primarily an intelligence
and law enforcement operation that requires cooperation around the world.”
Adding to the ‘being so intrinsically
tied to liberalism, you can’t see your own liberal bias’ formula that is so overwhelmingly prevalent in the mainstream
media, liberal reporters are often closely connected to other liberals in the political arena. In Loven’s case, she
is married to a man who heavily contributed to and was recognized by the Kerry campaign.
Why would anybody question
whether or not she is biased against Republicans and the President?
A recent report exposed the bias of liberal media
executive producer of the weekend edition of GOOD MORNING AMERICA, John Green, who exploded in a rage against the President
saying, “Are you watching this? Bush makes me sick. If he uses the 'mixed messages' line one more time, I'm going to
The personal beliefs of these people should be inconsequential to their ability to produce open-minded,
well researched, factually based and substantiated news reports free from their personal support systems, yet time and again
they fail to do so.
They have to realize, if they are ever to regain enough trust in the American populace to stop
them from viewing the media as negative and as untrustworthy, they have to remove all the partisan rhetorical attacks that
saturate their news reporting and simply report the facts.
And leave the opinion to openly partisan columnists and
expose the writers of editorial pages to the scrutiny of the public.
But to do so would mean they’d have to
admit their own bias and end their domineering control of the political discourse in this country while cutting off their
constant propensity to spread the liberal agenda through news reports.