A black has been elected. Don't that just burn your raceist white ass?

http://www.nationalblackrepublicans.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=pages.DYK-Why+MLK+was+a+Republican

I don't think I need to say anything else.

I do not believe that this election was anywhere close to fair and equitable. The "Gag" law that went into effect since the last Presidential election shows this clearly. It is (assumed) by most Americans that the news media is fair and impartial in their reporting on the canidates held up for election - in this election that was so obviously not the case.
How can, with the important positions being voted on, can a candidate NOT be know thru and thu? This can only occur when the news media has decide on who the news media decides on wanting to be elected. With this "gag" law in effect there is no longer a balance in what is presented to the public. It would now appear that the news media is just like the Russia "Tass" new - the only information given out is that the powers to be "decide" to give out. This is the beginning of the end in the society as we have know it.

I believe that the media coverage (or lack) of was very influential in who got elected in not only the President but all races. The "Gag" law has shown that with that law in effect that the news media now can not only influence elections but can almost decide them in most cases. With that law it is even more important that the news media be fair and investigate and report impartially on ALL canidates and their good and bad points.
I do not think this election was anything but a misdirection and therefore basically a travesty in this country where it is believed (wrongly) that the news media is impartial and fair in their reporting - that is obvously not the case as show in this election.
The "Gag" law should be repealed as only with that in place does someone that no one "understands" can be elected to such a high office.

Tino, buddy, you obviously don't create many sentences that don't contain the world "racist".

Learn to spell it.

Here's something that maybe you haven't thought about the MSM .

What if I went out and begged , borrowed , and maybe stole enough money to buy a printing press/Transmitter et al, and worked my butt off selling advertising and reported stuff until I could afford to pay people to do these jobs for me..for MY Paper/TV/Radio Station ...?..

Don't you think I can choose the direction in which the political spin goes ? I do ,after all ,OWN that media . Or DO I ?

Where does it say that the minute I choose to provide the public with Information I no longer have any political bent and MUST be "Fair and Unbiased" ?

What happened to my RIGHT to be contrary ?

Why do folks get off DEMANDING the "LIBERAL " Main Stream Media cease and desist with their non-reporting of political events and demand LAWS of MORE invasive investigations !

The OWNER of the MSM has an equal RIGHT to state his political leanings as ANYONE else..he simply has a better means to do so .

If you disagree with that..., Get your OWN Paper/TV/Radio Station..OR.. Buy space or time on the offending MSM and disagree !

Just DO NOT expect to do so for FREE !
The person who owns the paper has to pay for paper and ink , the person who owns the broadcast studio has to pay for the electricity . The person who owns the paper has to have people check your statements for spelling etc. and transfer your thoughts to the printed page .In the broadcast industry people are paid to record your thoughts and edit out any coughs or air-brush that booger hanging from your nose .

The Freedom of the Press does not equate to free press..however...

The press was intended to be free of government regulation.... Soon as the electronic media raised it's head the print press decided the "electronic" press must be guided by the gentle hand of government and open itself up to every Nut-Case in the community demanding "FAIRNESS and FREE TIME .(I've addressed that issue before , ad nauseum , so I'll spare you this time around .)

My point is this (FINALLY!YEA!)..

The second we enact laws to guide the direction and fairness of ANY political leaning , the press (print or electronic) becomes the puppet of whatever political party that is in office at the time and will TELL you what's fair and how you must lean !

I urge you to stop relying on LAWS to express displeasure with the MSM , simply stop buying their product and/or stop doing business with their advertisers and they'll get the message PRONTO !

Just leave the government out of it ! The Feds have never let loose a regulation or law that employed folks in DC ! Ask for a LAW and it's forever !

Well , since I'm on a roll , I've mentioned the cost of evoking your thoughts on the electronic media .... Blogs such as JW and worthy others must pay fees for gasbags such as myself..and I am awaiting the return of the tip jar .

Guilt , you see

As for the posted story... Isn't that like someone lying sweaty underneath you, post coitus, and saying, "You still have to win me over!"?

Otto,

I agree with you about leaving government out of the media, but I think you missed the whole point.

Sure, I can start up my own newspaper and support whatever political viewpoint I wish. The outrage/disappointment/cynicism comes into play when I publicly claim to be impartial, and then blatantly come down on one side or the other. Radio talk show hosts do not claim to be impartial, at least the good ones do not. Newspapers and Television news have before and still do claim this mantle of impartial journalistic integrity. We all know it is a myth, but during the election they rubbed it in our faces. As for showing my disdain for these clowns with my pocketbook, it is easy not to buy a newspaper you disagree with. The problem arises when newspapers and networks are owned by megacorporations like GE, who also own hundreds of other subsidiary brands. Personally I don't often have the time to properly investigate every single item I purchase, so I am sure that some of my cash has ended up in their pockets anyway.