Paper’s bias for Obama is clear
Advertisement
Text size: small | medium | large
Sharon Cummins
Published: October 9, 2008
Once again, I am disappointed in this paper’s obvious bias in the current presidential campaign. Twice last week, I had to groan as I opened my paper to see front page articles featuring Obama
supporters. (Nevermind the vie presidential debate, the Obama van was definitely more newsworthy!).
I contacted this very paper with an idea for a very interesting article. At Forest Park High School, a few students gathered to begin what they call “McCain Mondays.” This was an idea by the students, for
the students. Initially, this only involved a handful of young people, but each week it has multiplied to include more and more students. Originally, a reporter contacted me to say she would be out to cover
this story. Later, I was told it would be “next week…”and then again I was told “next week.” Well, there aren’t many more McCain Mondays until election day.
I can’t help but wonder, if this large group of youth were supporting Obama, would they be on the front page?
SHARON CUMMINS
Manassas
Post a Comment
The commenting period has ended or commenting has been deactivated for this article.
Can't find what you're looking for? Try our quick search:
Reader Reactions
Posted by ( gwenandgary ) on October 13, 2008 at 2:50 pm
A nerve has been struck. Interesting.
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( pwanon ) on October 12, 2008 at 6:15 am
“pwanon (racist)“
Two things:
1. Didn’t anyone ever tell you that it’s actually racist to call someone a racist with no evidence of it, whatsoever? Because you’re making a slanderous remark about someone (that I’m a racist) based on a generalization (I’m voting for the McCain). So…phdee…unless you can conjure up to actual evidence of anything I’ve said thats even remotely racist, lets keep the slander to a minimum.
2. Anyone who spells like you do…shouldn’t spell in public.
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( rafaelva ) on October 12, 2008 at 5:46 am
Let’s just say that the news that McCain felt it neccessary to open two campaign offices in Prince William to have been more news worthy, then a small group of students at one high school practicing junior political activism.
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( urf8 ) on October 11, 2008 at 9:56 pm
Sharon, The last time I checked, unless these youths are 18, they cannot vote anyway, so your point is irrelevent! Besides, many of these young people are likely infliuenced—sadly and unpatriotically—by their parents; many of whom are Republican-leaning military. If integrity, honor, loyalty, selfless service, dedication, patriotism, compassion, and leadership were truly ingrained in their being, they would not rally around Republicans!
Myself, as a 20-year military vet (former Sr. NCO, now commissioned officer)—stlll serving—cannot fathom why a fellow service member would support a Republican This party represents oppression (of mind and body), short-sightedness, fiscal irresponsibility, and bigotry! Many of these lost souls are unwitting accomplices—conditioned by their superiors in the military establishment; especially the service academies, but to a lesser extent in basic training and other military training courses—in elping the Republican Party destroy our great nation and tarnish her Constitution. Be a true patriot and vote for Barack Obama, Democrat, or Bob Barr, Libertarian!
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( phdee ) on October 11, 2008 at 4:20 pm
pwanon (racist): Speaking of foreign policy and Putin, assumbing the McCain-Palin ticket were to win - heven forgib - won’t it be,exiting to see the wench Palin conducting foreigh policy upmat the diomede Islands with Putin? Why this burlesque queen has foreign policy from watching Russia from Alaska. Ha ha ha ha!!! How dumb and stupid.
Reading the news about her having been found guilty of abusing ger governor’s position? Did you see Toddie
s involvment? Privacy invasions by an outsider???? Let’s see: she could e first VP; husband Todd could be 2nd VP.
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( phdee ) on October 11, 2008 at 4:11 pm
To “talking head” G&G;: Should prospective “journalists” pattern themselves aftrer the savegly vindictive, inexperienced, incompetent, and stup Palin? She is a “hot mam” role model, along with jer bodyguard husband, Toddie.
As for communicating the truth, do you work for Fox News, Rush, Hannity?
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( pwanon ) on October 11, 2008 at 2:52 pm
“Vote for real change on November 4th. Vote Obama”
Great idea Ray…I will. As soon as you tell me one time in his short, undistinguished career that he’s ever reformed anything.
You do that, and I’ll vote for the False Prophet of Change.
I honestly cringe to think of him as CIC. Chavez, Putin, Ahmadinejad, and the rest are licking their chops at the prospect. And I can assure you that they will test him immediately. And when he offers up the Democrat standard bearer of foreign policy…which is either A) Inaction or B) Unconditional Surrender…everyone will come to realize what a collossal mistake a BHO presidency would be.
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( rafaelva ) on October 11, 2008 at 8:59 am
I think that on face value, Bush was correct in saying we could handle the subprime failure, we can, it, in and of itself only triggered something worse. The insurance on those mortgages (CDS) failed to pay. That put everything else at risk. Particularly when it was determined which ones failed, who was the initial originator of the CDS, and the likelyhood of any CDS paying it’s obligation.
To put it nicely, SLAM all credit doors slam shut.
To point the finger at Bush, or Clinton is kinda weak, the idea of lessening or absorbing credit risk points back to Fannie Mae, Federal Home Loan Bank, FHA, even VA. That’s what they do, they insure mortgage Risk. It doesn’t make them guilty, it means they initiated the idea, and the commercial sector emulated them.
I don’t know when the idea of trading credit insurance (CDS) originated, but the action to not regulate the trading
in CDS’s can be placed somewhere around 2001-2002.
The meltdown we are looking at today, is a no faith meltdown, based on the fact that most of the holders of CDS’s either can’t pay the obligation the CDS incurrs, or the actual instrument and holder have disappeared into some invisable hinterland. (Secret Trading).
No body wants to loan or borrow money if the risk insurance available is riskier then the loan itself.
The need of the current administration to finance a war, and to respond to a economic downturn immediately after 9/11, opened up the credit markets, and no major effort was made to hold it in some form or reasonable check just opened the door to the problem. Low risk money turned into High risk money, and then just plain ole disappeared.
Is this really how the world ends? Not with a bang, but with a fizzle.
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( raywilliams ) on October 10, 2008 at 4:36 pm
willow, I took my money out of the market a few years ago. But to answer your question - how would I have known I was right if I had sounded the alarm before the market crashed! I had to “wait and see” to make sure it really happened.
But really, both times President Bush has addressed the nation regarding the market and associated credit crunch, he has done an excellent job explaining it in layman’s terms. This, to me, shows he and his advisors understand the cause and effect of the full picture.
Where I complain is that his advisors should have been able to forecast this and really, seen it coming a year or more ago and taken small, decisive steps to modulate the problem before it became a crisis.
This tells me one of two things. Nobody was watching or nobody was listening. Being polite, I generally feel President Bush is waiting out the clock, and had hope to get 5 more months before the crash - just so it didn’t happen on his watch. Perhaps bad luck it did, but it did.
Some posters here want to blame President Clinton for the crisis. I have not heard President Bush allude to that at any time. If Clinton policies were bad, then Bush had eight years to correct the policies.
Bush rode the wave of good times for a number of years and hoped to ride that wave back to Crawford. Alas, he wiped-out just as he neared the beach.
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( gwenandgary ) on October 10, 2008 at 3:49 pm
This paper, biased? Absolutely. So much so that your item has taken a back seat, presumably until the clock runs out on the event in question.
My suggestion is that these students that are being ignored look long and hard at what this paper is doing and think about how it might be righted eventually.
Might I suggest they consider a career in journalism?
As a reporter with experience in both radio and television, I can attest to the need for journalists that are willing to walk the neutral line and simply communicate the facts. My opinion is that many of my colleagues have broken with this idea and pursued other avenues. Their motivation for doing so differs greatly, but the net results to the public are pretty much the same.
For all the emphasis on careers of service, young people shouldn’t overlook the opportunities in the fields of print and broadcast journalism.
Believe it or not, communicating the truth is still a worthwhile pursuit, and a service to all. Think about it.
Report Inappropriate Comment