Let’s deal with the subject of media bias a bit here. Sometimes the leftist tilt of the media can be obvious, like Dan Rather slobbering all over Bill and Hillary with effusive words about what a great job they’re doing for the American people. Sometimes the bias is a bit more subtle – but still there.
Here’s the lead paragraph from the Atlanta Constitution of Thursday, July 12th. The headline reads “Medicare fund may get tapped.” The story was written by Bob Deans of the Cox Washington Bureau.
Washington – The White House conceded Wednesday that it was considering tapping into the Medicare Trust fund to balance a federal budget hit by a slowing economy and tax cuts.
First --- a literal interpretation of that paragraph would mean that the White house has conceded that the federal budget is taking a hit from tax cuts. Is that so? Did the White House really concede this fact? Somehow I don’t think so, but we won’t say this is bias -- maybe just sloppy reporting.
Let’s get on with the bias evidenced by this opening paragraph. All we have to do is apply a bit of logic.
Do you have a budget? OK then, how many different ways can you throw that budget out of kilter? Basically, just two. The amount of money coming in can decrease, the amount of money going out can increase, or a combination of the two. Isn’t it the same of the federal budget? If you’re running a surplus there are basically two things you can do to reduce the amount of that surplus. Something can happen to reduce income, or you can start eating away at the surplus with increased spending.
Increased spending you say? Didn’t I just read a story in the very same Atlanta Constitution two days ago about the incredible amounts of pork barrel projects being requested by Congressmen and Senators? I think the story said that the requests would amount to $280 billion if they were all approved. And what is the projected budget surplus? Why – it’s around $280 billion! Wow! What a surprise!
OK --- let’s noodle this one out just a bit further. Which party tends to say that tax cuts will reduce the budget surplus? Why, that would be Democrats. The left. And which party tends to say that increased government spending will pay havoc with the surplus? Well, that would be the Republicans. The right.
Now, go back and read the lead paragraph in Deans’ article again. Here, you don’t have to search for it … I’ll just reprint it.
Washington – The White House conceded Wednesday that it was considering tapping into the Medicare Trust fund to balance a federal budget hit by a slowing economy and tax cuts.
How many options did Mr. Deans give us for placing blame for the reduced budget surplus expectations? Well, we have the slowing economy and … what? Tax Cuts, that’s what. Just tax cuts. No mention of the role played by increased government spending. Why couldn’t end of the paragraph read “…. Balance a federal budget hit by a slowing economy, tax cuts and increased government spending.”
Bias. It’s there, folks. Just look for it.
Here’s the lead paragraph from the Atlanta Constitution of Thursday, July 12th. The headline reads “Medicare fund may get tapped.” The story was written by Bob Deans of the Cox Washington Bureau.
Washington – The White House conceded Wednesday that it was considering tapping into the Medicare Trust fund to balance a federal budget hit by a slowing economy and tax cuts.
First --- a literal interpretation of that paragraph would mean that the White house has conceded that the federal budget is taking a hit from tax cuts. Is that so? Did the White House really concede this fact? Somehow I don’t think so, but we won’t say this is bias -- maybe just sloppy reporting.
Let’s get on with the bias evidenced by this opening paragraph. All we have to do is apply a bit of logic.
Do you have a budget? OK then, how many different ways can you throw that budget out of kilter? Basically, just two. The amount of money coming in can decrease, the amount of money going out can increase, or a combination of the two. Isn’t it the same of the federal budget? If you’re running a surplus there are basically two things you can do to reduce the amount of that surplus. Something can happen to reduce income, or you can start eating away at the surplus with increased spending.
Increased spending you say? Didn’t I just read a story in the very same Atlanta Constitution two days ago about the incredible amounts of pork barrel projects being requested by Congressmen and Senators? I think the story said that the requests would amount to $280 billion if they were all approved. And what is the projected budget surplus? Why – it’s around $280 billion! Wow! What a surprise!
OK --- let’s noodle this one out just a bit further. Which party tends to say that tax cuts will reduce the budget surplus? Why, that would be Democrats. The left. And which party tends to say that increased government spending will pay havoc with the surplus? Well, that would be the Republicans. The right.
Now, go back and read the lead paragraph in Deans’ article again. Here, you don’t have to search for it … I’ll just reprint it.
Washington – The White House conceded Wednesday that it was considering tapping into the Medicare Trust fund to balance a federal budget hit by a slowing economy and tax cuts.
How many options did Mr. Deans give us for placing blame for the reduced budget surplus expectations? Well, we have the slowing economy and … what? Tax Cuts, that’s what. Just tax cuts. No mention of the role played by increased government spending. Why couldn’t end of the paragraph read “…. Balance a federal budget hit by a slowing economy, tax cuts and increased government spending.”
Bias. It’s there, folks. Just look for it.
