Former Massachusetts Governor and current GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney is now sitting at the right hand of the Armed Forces in terms of media treatment.
Our military is beating the daylights out of the terrorists in Iraq and Afghanistan, so of course we never hear a word about it. Once it became clear that we were beating the terrorists in Iraq, Congressional Democrats, and some Republicans who agree with them, immediately left the battlefield, claimed victory even though they were dead wrong all along, and shifted the discussion to political improvements in Iraq.
Word on military successes is virtually non-existent. We still hear about the occasional suicide bomber, but that is only because the media is following the "if it bleeds it leads" adage.
Recently I was told by a Marine friend who is in Iraq that the American media presence is down to roughly 30 reporters now, compared to hundreds a year ago when they were poised like jackals, waiting to feed on the death of President George Bush's Iraq policy.
But jackals rarely feed on live prey, especially healthy live prey that can fight back, so they have moved on, looking for carrion elsewhere.
In a similar light, Mitt Romney has been declared out of the running for the GOP nomination, using as evidence polls that would have to improve exponentially to be called questionable.
For instance, how many people are talking about Romney's landslide win in the Maine caucuses Saturday, over all other GOP candidates, including John McCain who trailed Romney by 30 points?
Is this a harbinger of things to come on Super Tuesday? Maybe, maybe not. But the issue is, why is the media not reporting on it?
The media reported on Nevada, Iowa and New Hampshire, all of which are supposed to be trend setting states, none of which really are, and none of which have significant numbers of delegates to add to the convention. You have to win all of them to get the delegate numbers to add up to anything, and no candidate won all of them.
However, Romney took Nevada, Michigan and Wyoming which are now added to Maine to keep him close in the delegate count. He also is in good shape in California, and who knows where else.
National pollster Scott Rasmussen has the race very tight, but his polls seem to be the only ones saying that.
On the national level the media was saying last week that Romney had "ceded" the northeast, but he is ahead in the Massachusetts polls, and he just won Maine. So just what part of the northeast did Romney give up?
It is very easy to deal with the media once it comes down to a Republican versus a Democrat. The mainstream media is overwhelmingly biased in favor of liberal Democrats, just ask Joe Lieberman, so I ignore anything that arises in that forum.
If you want to know the truth about any national issue regarding politics, the economy, the military or even American history for that matter, you have to go to the Internet and read viewpoints from numerous sources to get a decent overview.
But here we are in the midst of a primary campaign, and the media seems to have picked John McCain for the GOP favorite, and is in total disarray over the Democrats. Last year, the media was solidly behind Hillary Clinton for the Democrats and Rudy Giuliani for the Republicans.
But Giuliani went down in flames and Barack Obama rose up out of nowhere on the Democratic side.
I don't care which candidate the Democrats put up for president. I don't think they can win, unless the GOP runs Mickey Mouse. The Democrats and the liberal media are trying to hide the truth about the War on Terror, since we are winning, and are claiming it is a non-issue, much the same as they are treating immigration as a non-issue.
But in my totally informal, yet so often accurate way, I keep hearing that the War on Terror and our military successes are huge issues, as are illegal immigration and the economy. People also link the economy to the influx of illegal invaders, and the crushing cost they are imposing on American taxpayers.
The media can try to avoid it for all they want, but people are voting their hearts, their minds and their pocketbooks.
So, is Romney's showing in Maine a bellwether vote, or an anomaly? He is very close to McCain in the delegate count, which is all that really counts when the convention rolls around, so what if Romney wins California, as seems quite possible? That one state is worth a half-dozen smaller states. Doesn't that matter?
It has been a long, long time since the media had any impact on what I believe about anything. There are commentators I respect, and I do seek out their opinions. But then I decide whether I agree or not, and why, and make my decisions based on my own research and beliefs.
But I do look for some basic information from the media, such as whether one of the 50 states is holding a primary or a caucus and who wins. Romney won the Maine caucuses on Saturday.
Where do I lodge my complaint about the lack of coverage on that issue?
Monday, February 04, 2008