The So-Called Liberal Media

I often hear Republicans make the claim that the media has a liberal bias.  This assertion is supported by numerous polls and questionnaires showing that this claim is indeed a fact.  The Media Research Center has put out a nice article that summarizes all the data in one neat place for us:

 

But by the actions of the press in regards to Ron Paul’s campaign, I have to wonder just what kind of bias the “liberal” media really has.

I opened up Google News this morning to look for recent articles on the Republican debate last night.  Google returned nearly 5000 articles on the subject:

If one bothers to actually read any of those articles, they will notice one candidate who is conspicuously missing.  The top article by Fox News on the debate doesn’t even mention Paul’s name once – not even to simply say that he was present at the debate.

So how can it be possible that all of these thousands of reporters are liberal if hardly a one of them mentions the most liberal candidate running for the GOP nomination?

Let’s look at the list of liberal policy positions Ron Paul has in comparison to the other candidates, with the exception of Gary Johnson:

Ron Paul is in favor of the following policy positions:

1. End the multiple foreign wars of aggression.

2.  End the domestic war against people who smoke dried vegetable matter.

3.  End crony capitalism, bailouts, subsidies, no-bid contracts, etc.. etc..

4.  End the Patriot Act and restore 1st, 2nd, 4th, and 5th amendment rights.

5.  Reign in the massive expansion of the police state.

I mean seriously, if someone is a liberal, shouldn’t they be jumping up and down with joy over Ron Paul’s candidacy?  Here is a guy who wants to end the war on drugs and end our imperialist foreign policy for Christ sake!  So why are they ignoring him?  Wouldn’t a real liberal want Ron Paul to win over any other candidate?  If reporters really were liberal, shouldn’t they all be shoving Ron Paul down America’s collective throat?

Of course, the media is decidedly not liberal – they are all very neoconservative.  If we define neoconservatism as being a position that favors foreign wars of aggression, massive bailouts, crony capitalism, and strict controls over various aspects of personal behavior (gun laws, economic regulations, consumer safety regulations that tell us what we may purchase or what activities we may engage in, etc.. ), it becomes clear that the “liberal” media is really nothing but a bunch of corporate whores.

Consider healthcare – the “liberal” media is telling you that the State should take over responsibility for paying for healthcare, but isn’t that exactly what Big Pharma wants?  A customer with an unlimited pocketbook?

The “liberal” media is telling you that insurance companies hate regulations that tell them what coverage they must package into their healthcare plans, but isn’t that exactly what the insurance industry wants?  Doesn’t the insurance industry want everyone to buy as much coverage for as many problems as we possibly can?  Doesn’t expanded coverage mean bigger profits for them?  Doesn’t the State helping to pay for insurance bloat the pocketbooks of the insurance industry?  If all the insurance companies must offer the same coverage by law, doesn’t that kill competition among the industry?  Doesn’t competition HURT private corporations while simultaneously bringing benefits to consumers?

Sure, there are a handful of “liberals” smattered about the media establishment, but the overwhelming majority of articles that come out of the mainstream press are in favor of the neoconservative agenda.  Many media articles are simply a regurgitation of press releases put out by government officials!  - Since when did it become the “liberal” media’s job to regurgitate and disseminate government propaganda without question?

This article is for all of those “liberals” out there who absolutely refuse to think for themselves.  Why are you continuing to read and believe what the “liberal” media has to say about anything when it is clear that they are offering you a choice between neocon A or neocon B?  The “liberal” media is telling you that the only viable candidates for the GOP nomination are warmongering corporatists.  The “liberal” media is offering you a choice between a Wall Street insider and a former Federal Reserve Bank director!  The “liberal” media is keeping you from seeing through the facade of the Obama administration by refusing to compare Obama’s policies to those of George Bush – we all know that there are almost no differences.

Stop believing the lies and open your eyes.

The so-called “liberal” media has an agenda alright, and it is certainly not in your best interest.  They are interested in making sure their media empire remains propped up by the State.  They are interested in making sure that the Federal Reserve system remains intact to rob the ignorant masses for their benefit.  They are interested in making sure you don’t think too much.

Listen to Ron Paul’s debate responses and decide for yourself who the real liberal is, Ron Paul or the neoconservative favorites, Rick Perry and Barack Obama.

 

 

 

  • DuaneKangre

    naive analysis

    • http://www.libertariannews.org/ Michael Suede

      Thanks for such an insightful response.

  • uncarvedblock123

    I’m not sure I agree with the assertion that they are all neocons. There is no doubt that they equally oppose Dr. Paul because he is not a statist, but that hardly makes them all right wing. To paraphrase Hayek: they are just socialists from a different party. If Ron Paul believed in all the changes that you list AND thought the state was the only way to enforce such rights, the progressive media would be carrying him around on their shoulders. Similarly, if he believed in free market economics as well as private property AND believed that the state was the only way to enforce such things, conservatives would be lauding him. It’s the tail end of each argument that scares both progressives and conservatives alike.

    • http://www.libertariannews.org/ Michael Suede

      It all depends upon how you define neoconservatism.

      “ If we define neoconservatism as being a position that favors foreign wars of aggression, massive bailouts, crony capitalism, and strict controls over various aspects of personal behavior (gun laws, economic regulations, consumer safety regulations that tell us what we may purchase or what activities we may engage in, etc.. ), it becomes clear that the “liberal” media is really nothing but a bunch of corporate whores.”

      Hayek and Mises called them socialists in their day.

  • Laurie

    Why won’t the liberal media ignore a candidate that doesn’t have standings in the polls? Why waste the money?