Rasmussen poll: Reporters are trying to help Obama win

Unlike the studies you libs like to post as the be-all end-all, I never used the word IN EVERY CASE and Murdoch is clearly a publisher/owner whose influence is evidence in the New York Post, for instance.

But that has as much to do with WHO HAS BEEN HIRED TO DO THE WRITING AND EDITING as it does Murdoch sending directives from behind the curtain.....

Don't try and put words into my mouth that I never uttered.

 

So does HOWARD KRAUTHAMMER writing for the WASHINGTON POST make the POST a REPUBLICAN RAG?

 

It is that the liberal snobs and elitists in the media are too arrogant to understand that their version of what America should be is not what most middle of the road Americans who are living in the mainstream and grinding out a living want.

 

Who are the decision-makers at Newsweek that have given Obama about 19 covers this year, and McCain maybe two.

 

Yeah, I'm sure that's an accurate count.

And did someone say Newsweek covers?

 

Hooray, the capital letters are back!

Look, the study you posted said that over 50% of both national and local writers considered themselves to be moderates.

So how do you get the majority of writers and editors at newspapers being liberals? Is it because they really are liberals and don't want to admit it, or is being a moderate close enough in your book?

 

No, I'd say any conservatives working for that paper -- a paper by the way whose late long-time editor and publisher admitted that if Nixon were a Democrat she'd have been a lot less likely to greenlight the publication of the watergate scandal -- are clearly in such an overwhelming majority that they are fighting for crumbs at this point......

 

Fighting for crumbs, as in running a SYNDICATED COLUMN run by HUNDREDS OF PAPERS across the COUNTRY? Those kinds of CRUMBS?

 

What does that have to do with anything?

Editorials and opinions -- while interesting -- are just that -- OPINIONS.

That's not scary.

Paul Krugman has become no different than Rush Limbaugh and mostly because his column is the same kind of blind Bush-bashing crapola as Limbaugh spews about Obama/Clinton or whoever else.

What I'm talking about is the way news stories are written, laid out, what photos are run, where they are placed, what ledes are used in the stories, who are the "expert" voices that are quoted and so on and so forth -- and if you read WaPo stories, there is no question where many of their "objective" reporters and editors stand on the issues.......

 

I'd be willing to bet most of those so-called moderates are really left-leaning to liberal, particularly based on the election numbers of the washington press corps, and even if that's not the case -- you don't find it a bit unnerving that one side of the aisle outnumbers the other 4-to-1?

 

And where is that? Where do they stand?

 

So - because they're "out of touch," and Americans pay no attention to them - the number and percentages of "liberals" who work in the press has no meaning, despite your many postings to the contrary.