I know the Democrats have a lot to hide this Primary season. But what is the media hiding? Why are they STILL playing favorites when it comes to Obama.
In South Carolina, the SC Democratic Party decided NOT to hold a Primary in 2012. What they decided to do was hold elections during their party reorganization meetings between now and the end of March. Of course Dick Harpootlian will say it is because of the expense. But thats not very open and democratic of them. And the only way to find this information out was by going to the SC Elections website.
No media is interested in how Obama is doing in the Democratic Primaries. I mean, here is the sitting president with "no opposition" in the Primary and he only got 82% of the vote in New Hampshire. (There is no way of knowing how many votes he got from the Iowa Caucus because those numbers aren't available anywhere.
But the mainstream media only seems to be interested in reporting the GOP races.
Why? Wouldn't the people like to know that the Democratic Party is not as "unified" as they would have you believe? Don't you think they would be interested in knowing that if Hillary were on the ballot, Obama would have a RACE on his hands? I mean, there are states and districts all across the country where Hillary would actually BEAT Obama at the polls.
But where is the media on any of this. Asleep at the wheel and STILL a tool of the Democratic Party and the "Yes We Can" front man, President Obama himself.
I not only demand that the Democratic Party open this information up instead of hiding in the shadows of their slick and deceptive leadership. And I chastise the media for not standing up in the role as the Fourth Estate. They squander their privilege as the watchdogs of government for the people and maintain their "need' for access to the current powers that be. That is a sad excuse, as they should neither be influenced nor controlled by ANY governing body, because they are the people's eyes and ears within that said body politics.
(For those of you unfamiliar with the idea of the 'fourth estate,' it was considered a separate body to watch over and advise the other three main groups within government. Its current position as the eyes and ears of the people came from Edmund Burke and others during his time. They promoted the idea that the media (which they referred to journalist as a professional group, or editors of papers - but with today's diverse media of radio, television and internet, is any news reporter) is the watchdogs of government, being only beholden to their readers. Unswayed by who was in power, as those individuals were transient and served by the will of the people, they (media) are free to shed the light of truth and public scrutiny on those politicians and elected officials, so that the people could stay informed of how those they elected governed.
Without an unbiased and unswayed media, the people have no advocate to keep watch over their interests. And today more and more politicians fail to realize they govern only by the will of the people. So today, more than ever, we need the media to NOT abdicate their responsibilities.)
Agree with me that the Democrats are hiding the growing unpopularity of their President by those in his own Party or that the media has abdicated their responsibilities, or disagree with me on any and all topics discussed here. Either way, it makes no difference to me. All I ask is that it be YOU who agree or disagree, and not that someone TOLD you to agree or disagree with me. I just ask that you look at all the points I make and THINK about it. Think for yourself and don't be SHEEP. If you do that, than I consider my job well done. But hey, this is, after all, just me Thinking Out Loud.
Have yourself a great day.