As much as I try to not be influenced by the liberal bias of the main stream media, if you pay any attention at all, you canâ€™t help but at least notice what they are trying to influence. By the way, donâ€™t get me wrong, there are also people on the right who definitely have agendas they are trying to push also. I would imagine bias in reporting has existed as long as there has been reporting. Whatâ€™s so notable about the leftist bias (which they generally still deny) in the media isnâ€™t so much that it exists, but rather how the large majority of the media seems to have long been in lockstep with the liberal agenda (while denying any bias). I mean seriously, when the Democratic party can claim to have been the champion and originator of many of the civil rights laws and events in our country, and be supported in that by the media, that says a lot about the media. After all, just a few minutes of not very strenuous reading will show just the opposite.
While the media often (rightly) refers to the â€śI Have a Dreamâ€ť speech (which by the way if youâ€™ve never heard it, I recommend you take the time to listen to it) given by Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., they seldom, if ever, mention a rousing speech given by Governor George Wallace (a democrat) in June of 1963. Maybe itâ€™s because Governor Wallace was giving a speech supporting segregation standing on the steps of the University of Alabama while he was being forced by the federal government (backed by National Guard troops) to allow the first black students entry to the institution. Granted, those troops were sent by President John F. Kennedy (a democrat), but since Governor Wallace went on to have a long career in the Democratic party, I would have to say his pro-segregation stance (remarkably unreferenced by the present main stream media) couldnâ€™t have bothered the rest of the left very much. I wonder what kind of jokes Governor Wallace and longtime Democratic Senator, and former recruiter for the Ku Klux Klan, Robert Byrd told each other in private. Doesnâ€™t it seem odd that a disagreement over party policy among the Democrats resulted in one of them having to use armed troops against the other?
One more point about media bias before I go on. As far as I can tell, the majority of conservative commentators will tell you flat out they are conservative. What they do is openly push a conservative agenda because they (openly) believe it to be best for our country. On the other hand, the progressives, or liberals, (cough, Chris Matthews, cough) seem to try to convince the public they are merely â€śneutralâ€ť observers who are just reporting (in an unbiased manner) the facts. As much as I think Alan Colmes is an idiot (who has clearly made a lot of money doing what he does), I have to give him credit for being an unabashed, and openly admitted, liberal. While I disagree with the left onâ€¦ well, nearly everything, they are certainly welcome to their point of view, I just think they should admit to it.
Anyway, something the left has been attacking for a long time is capitalism. Because a real capitalist economic system is diametrically opposed to a great deal of what the left is pushing, naturally, they take any opportunity to discredit capitalism. In the rare instances where they will actually discuss the capitalist system, rather than just â€śtrash talkâ€ť it with some of their standard talking points they will often refer to it as uncompassionate, or unfeeling. Meaning of course, it leaves out compassion, in favor of cold, cruel, market forces.
While I could go on at great length about how itâ€™s just not possible to create a capitalist system without the human factor, or about how the progressiveâ€™s definition of compassion isnâ€™t really compassion, thatâ€™s not what I want to mention today. This time I want to deal with a phrase the left uses quite commonly in their attacks on capitalism.
Okay, first of all, there truly is no such thing as a perfect capitalist system, or for that matter a perfectly functioning economic or governance method of any kind. Whatever method people develop for dealing with each other, whether in an economic or government manner, includes people and is thus going to be much less than perfect. Thatâ€™s a given. Interestingly, in my opinion, even though the people on the left claim to be interested in the actual people above all else, I think the human factor is the thing they deny the most.
Lately, it seems the left has been really focusing on using the term â€ścronyâ€ť capitalism. If I take their meaning correctly, it seems they want us to believe capitalism means a few people get together in back rooms to run our economy. Apparently, when these people meet, they divide up the economic pie between themselves, slap each other on the back, light up big cigars, and then go back to their plush offices where they can more comfortably count their money.
Since as I mentioned above, there are human beings involved in business, Iâ€™m sure there really are a lot of back room deals that go on, both legal and illegal. However; as far as a few corporate â€śraidersâ€ť controlling our economy against market forces, the suggestion is ludicrous. If it were that easy IBM would still control the lionâ€™s share of their market, and Bill Gates would still be working out of a garage somewhere.
Hereâ€™s what really strikes me about â€ścronyismâ€ť. There really is an identifiable group which meets on a regular basis, with a lot of backroom deals, to divide up the wealth of our nation. These people get together, and among themselves, mostly out of the public eye, make decisions regarding who gets to keep what (no matter who actually earned it) and basically arrange our economy to suit themselves. They truly are a group of â€ścroniesâ€ť who really do make decisions that affect the lives of every man, woman, and child in the United States, or sometimes even in the entire world. On top of all of that, most of these people are wealthy, and I doubt if many of them at all produce anything in their own right. Since this group of â€ścrony directorsâ€ť arenâ€™t hidden, you would think the press would be all over them.
Iâ€™m sure youâ€™ve already figured out Iâ€™m talking about our very own government. There truly is a cabal of powerful people dividing up the wealth of the nation. Unfortunately, almost all of them are elected officials and their bureaucratic accomplices.
As far as Iâ€™m concerned, a truly â€śunbiasedâ€ť main stream media would spend more time investigating crooked government officials, of both parties, and a lot less time blaming a mostly non-existent â€ścronyâ€ť capitalism for our economic problems.
By the way, if you want to see how well the leftâ€™s programs really work, look no further than Detroit, which may well be soon followed by California (Iâ€™m curious to know how Alan Colmes will blame Detroit on conservatism, but not curious enough to actually listen to him).
Bruce Kreitler is the author of Obamageddon (the Culmination of the Progressive Looting of America) and posts this and other articles at BruceKreitler.com.