Follow The Republic:
From: Sally Reindl
Received: Oct. 1
On Saturday, two local men were given the front page of the Republic to express their opinions and “feelings” about our presidential candidates. Barack Obama was given better marks across the board.
No facts were presented. Their actual records or accomplishments were not considered. Yet, a casual reader, or an uninformed voter could come away with the impression that Obama is the better candidate.
We are facing what many of us consider the most important presidential election ever. The two men running have very different visions for America and very different goals for our country.
When the country is $16 trillion in debt, $51,000 for every man, woman and child, what does likeability matter? When unemployment remains above 8 percent, does it matter which man is the most eloquent? A serious study of each man’s record, plans for the future, experience, etc. is what is needed.
The bias in the comments of these two men was evident. Every category included a negative implication about Mitt Romney, including “down-on-his-luck,” “difficult month,” “slipping,” “gaffes” and “out-of-touch.” Romney was criticized for his “premature” comments on Libya, but Obama, who is the current commander-in-chief, was not held responsible for his foreign policy or the security issues surrounding the terrorist attack.
I would hope that in the future, if the presidential election is covered, the Republic would present a serious and responsible comparison of the two candidates. There should be no place for media bias in this election. It is too important; we need facts.
Don't settle for a preview.
Subscribe today to see the full story!
All comments are moderated before posting. Your email address must be verified with Disqus in order for your comment to appear.
View our commenting guidelines and FAQ's here.
All content copyright ©2014 The Republic, a division of Home News Enterprises unless otherwise noted.