LA Times With The False Neutrality Re Candidates Economic Plans

The bias of the MSM continues, which is often disguised in the language of false neutrality. For example, in this article in the LA Times the author condemns BOTH McCain and Obama. With McCain, it is obvious what the criticisms are, the current financial crisis directly undercuts McCain's strong support for deregulation, and McCain has been flipping around trying to square his recent populist rhetoric with his long history fighting regulation.

However, the article barely mentions Biden, and it criticizing Obama by characterizing his economic record as "thin" based on his short career in the Senate. The article contains no reference to his ten year career in the Illinois legislature where he was chairman of the health and human services committee OR MORE IMPORTANTLY Obama's economic proposals, which have remained consistent throughout the campaign. Afterall, aren't the proposals the things that we should really look at? Yet, no mention of this, or the numerous speeches or interviews that Obama has given on the economy.

Thus, the LA Times sets up a false neutrality by trying to bring down Obama to the level of McCain. This is the type of subtle and pervasive bias that we have to work to overcome where the media tries to prop up McCain by bring Obama down to McCain's level.

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-onthemedia18-2008sep18,0,123172.story

/snip

Here's a shout out to the few news organizations, led by Bloomberg News, that have set aside the blathering long enough to look at what McCain and Obama actually have done in the past.

Bloomberg reporters Alison Fitzgerald and Christopher Stern found that Obama's record on economic reform was "thin" and that McCain now pledged to become a regulator although he "has spent most of his quarter-century in Congress advocating deregulation."

The Bloomberg reporters detailed how the Arizona senator supported deregulation of the financial services industry in 1999 while, at other times, opposing greater controls on derivatives trading and other measures.

While now talking tough about overpaid executives, the reporters noted that McCain just last year opposed a House measure that would have allowed shareholders to take nonbinding votes on executive pay.

As recently as February, McCain called himself a "deregulator" and argued to "keep government out of these issues and policies."

The Bloomberg story does not leave McCain's cupboard bare on the regulation front. It reports that in 2003, the Republican pushed legislation to "create a new supervisor" for the government-sponsored mortgage lenders that are at the root of much of the current crisis.

But McCain clearly needed more to flesh out his stance as the tough new sheriff of Wall Street.

Fred Barnes on Fox News wondered: "John McCain says he's going to regulate. But what does he have in mind?"

Barnes could have asked the same of Obama.

The Democrat didn't arrive in Washington until 2005, and so missed many debates about oversight of the financial system. He pushed legislation the following year to rein in fraudulent mortgages and spoke out last March about improving regulation of Wall Street -- the sort of measures McCain now appears to be embracing, Bloomberg reported.

/snip

Notice the loaded characterization of Obama? Obama immediately introduced legislation addressing mortgages, and this is characterized as a negative?

:puke:

The article discusses both Palin and McCain, then compares their combined resumes to Obama, with no mention of Biden. Biden has a longer career than McCain, and the author of the story could not address Biden's expertise? Was their a danger that Obama's long held economic proposals, and Biden's experience, would just prove that McCain/Palin are over-matched on the economy?

No excuse, now. You've written a good, solid rant. Don't waste it! Send it to them right away.

Lost better editorial direction and writers.