THE Place For Politics?

I like to watch all the different channels as I do feel some are skewed a little. I do have to say CNN has been pretty decent in staying impartial I think. MSNBC seems a little on the Dem's side depending on the show/host. Fox definitely likes the right. But CNN I think has provided the best coverage overall. If anyone gets an F I think ABC has earned that one even though as you said we're only halfway through this horse race.

I like the THE TODAY SHOW. Matt Lauer is a great co-host for the show. I liked it better when he was co-hosting with Katie Couric rather than Meredith Viera. Meredith looks as if she is forcing the lines of communication. When it was Matt and Katie, it seemed so natural as if they were talking directly to you. I think the whole entire cast works. Al Roker and Ann Curry are great too. When they are all together its like a bunch of friends just chatting. They are all very talented. dl

I do not think it will be to much of a shock to you but I would have to say Fox News Channel. I love that fact DNC Chairmen Howard Dean has told his fellow Democrats to stay away from Fox News, yet they disobey him all the time. Brit Hume is an elegant speaker, and Fred Barnes is an expert political commentator.

Hello Annie, As I see it, covering the election is no different than covering any other aspect of the news. Either the news is presented with journalistic integrity, or it isn’t. I would have to say that Tim Russert, of "Meet the Press" fame, is far and away the most 'fair' U.S. journalist of the past decade. His effort to unravel the issues, without personal bias is highly commendable. I place Chris Wallace as a very close second. Chris Wallace doesn't 'softball' anyone! His questions have pin-point accuracy, and are equally tough to all. He never offers anyone a ‘free ride’. For those who may not watch him frequently, the temptation is there to believe that he leans right just because he’s a Fox news commentator. Though, once one begins watching his show, they learn just how fair and tough he really is. As a journalist, he is far above the competition for his journalistic integrity. And, in my opinion, puts his father’s journalistic integrity to shame. I prefer to watch Fox News. (Yeah, I know that comes as a huge shock.) Though, the reason might surprise you. My two favorites are “Hannity & Colmes” followed by “O’Reilly”. I place “Hannity & Colmes” at the top because the whole premise of the show is to offer the far left, and far right perspective. Every guest is confronted by both extremes. Every group of pundits consists of Dem & GOP representatives. If one wants to make up their own mind, then I believe that watching “Hannity & Colmes” is simply the best venue for doing so. As for O’Reilly, there is no question that he leans right, though he makes no pretenses about it. I respect that! What I most begrudge about today’s journalists is that they present the news as if it’s objective, when upon scrutiny of the types and angle of the questions presented, it is clear as daylight that there is a wholesale absence of objectivity. I don’t begrudge anyone their perspective – as long as they don’t effort themselves to obfuscate it. Either present the info with an acknowledged bias, or make a commitment to reject bias altogether. I would be remiss in not acknowledging one other journalist. Though, she is clearly biased, and makes no pretense about it, I give her the top recognition for the highest level of honesty in industry. That woman is Michelle Malkin. Here is a specific example: In March 2007 there was a big political rally in D.C. Hubby and I were there as part of the “Gathering of Eagles”. The only journalist who accurately told the story of what happened that day was Michelle Malkin. Every major news outlet was there. Though, it was a BITTER cold and windy day. With my own eyes, I watched every news outlet remain inside their news vans for the overwhelming majority of the event. The reporting of that day by most of the news outlets was utterly pathetic, yet was presented by each as absolutely factual ‘eye-witness’ accounts, including Fox. I was disgusted at how the media allowed their own desire for comfort to inhibit their desire to get the facts straight. The absurdity of the lazy reporting is most clearly demonstrated by the presentation of the numbers of participants there that day. Every news outlet reported that there were between 5,000 – 30,000 ‘anti-war’ protesters, and a few hundred pro-military veterans. Yet, the blue ‘Parks Dept’ helicopters flew overhead all day. According to the Parks Dept.’s estimate, there were 30K GOE, and between 2500- 3000 anti-war protesters there that day. Hubby & I were there, and witnessed it with our own eyes --- “Constitution Mall’ was absolutely swimming in leather, as most of the GOE are also members of Veteran’s Motorcycle Groups. “Rolling Thunder”, and “The Patriot Guard” were very heavily represented. Though, many other Veteran Biker Clubs were also in attendance. The media never bothered to discern why there were so many leather jackets on the Mall that day. The GOE were dispatched in the hundreds, and thousands to protect specific war memorials, based on their proximity to the designated, permitted protest area of “Code Pink” and the pro-illegal immigration groups. The Parks Dept. numbers alligned with the GOE numbers. So, the media let their aversion to the elements prevent them from accurately reporting the news. The only exception was Michelle Malkin, who in her parka, reported on the complete events of the day, from throughout The Mall. Fox lost a lot of respect that day … though, Michelle Malkin gained a great deal of respect from Hubby & I, and the 30k GOE who were there, braving the elements ourselves. The moral of the story is that few accurately present the news. So, in the absence of first-hand knowlege, gleaning the extremes of any issue remains the best way to find ‘the truth’, which generally lies somewhere in the middle!