"Absolute Power Corrupts Absolutely"

Ok, lets get political...

Well, quasi-political, more news-critical.
CNN put out a poll after Obama was elected, asking if people felt that the media supported/reported more positively, Obama or McCain during the election process. The poll ended with Obama 74%, McCain 26%.

That wasn't surprising to me at all.

Between CNN, ABC, CBS, NBC, and MSNBC, the polls would support my claim that "their" candidate won. Fox stands alone...obviously.

So what's the point of the blog?

First, its not to tear down Obama AT ALL. What it is however, is an attempt to say that "absolute power corrupts absolutely." Too much power is dangerous, and if the election process was any indication of the next 4-8 years, we'll be fooled, lied to, and pushed a direction that is of the major news syndicates leanings - and that is most deffinately to the left.
(if you're more left leaning, that's fine. but the news/media's job isn't to push an agenda, but to hold accountable and tell the truth of what goes on in DC. otherwise, isn't it state-run news??? that didn't go so well for russia, china, germany, venezuela, cuba, iraq, iran, lybia, syria, etc etc etc...)

So where are we now?

This past week, Obama tapped Geithner as the Treasury Secretary. Unfortunately, as the overseer of the IRS, Geithner had "forgotten" to pay his Social Security taxes from 2001-2004; over $34,000 in taxes. This should be an open and shut case in my opinion. The news should have been all over this. But instead, they're reporting it as a "hiccup," "an innocent mistake." Really...?
During his campaign, Obama promised to see an end to lobbyist appointments. However, William Lynn was tapped for Deputy Defense Secretary. William Lynn is one of the biggest defense lobbyists in the US. He's probably great for the job, but Obama promised not to be in the hand of lobbyists - that's what "W" did. I haven't heard anything from the media about this one.

NPR last week said that they "wanted Obama to be a great American President," and that it was their job "to make him that great American President." National Public Radio...that's a main source for information and "truth" in reporting for a ton of people, and it sounds like its their agenda to "make" Obama that great President.

I did hear the media come out against Obama's choice to lead his innagural prayer though. Apparently Rick Warren (pastor of Saddleback in CA) is too anti-gay, right-wing conservative, and radical for the likes of CNN, MSNBC, CBS, etc. Of course, Obama was never once asked about his Chicago pastor, Rev. Wright. If it wasn't for Hillary in the debates, you'd be left to the Sean Hannity's and Bill O'Riley's to cover that. But FOX isn't newsworthy.It seems when the mainstream news/media outlets criticize, its only against a more conservative agenda. Fair or not, that's where we're at as a country. And to top it all off, many of the larger news publications are now asking for bailout money. Is it possible to get a federal government bailout and NOT be beholden to that same federal government? I guess we'll see.

My solution...be skeptical of everything!

I'd rather the news organizations be critical of everything and write the truth, positive or negative. They should seek the truth, not a party or agenda. Otherwise, who can we trust?

That's it for now.

-Ross

p.s.