Editors out of touch with reality

I read "Our View" (Sunday, Sept. 7, 2008) and was amused.

I am not sure which editor wrote the article, but they are truly out of touch with reality.

The article took offense at how the Republican Convention assaulted the media. Did the editor take offense at the Democratic Convention? Of course not, because the Democrats did not assault the media.

Why? Because the media is an ally to the liberals and wouldn't dare assault the media.

On the same page was an article by Paul Green, director of the Institute for Politics at Roosevelt University. He was discussing the selection of Gov. Sarah Palin as John McCain's running mate and how it will impact the election. Later in the article, he questioned whether the strategy would work.

In that paragraph he indicated that "He, (Barack Obama) still has a huge advantage in campaign dollars, a disciplined political operation and, yes, a fawning media."

It is no secret that the media fawned all over Hillary until she started losing primaries to Obama. When the media shifted its attention to Obama, the Clintons complained.

Doesn't this tell you the tremendous influence the media has with voters? A magazine recently had a cover showing Obama and his wife as a loving couple, and directly below was some negative bullet points about Palin.

Few people might purchase that magazine and read the complete articles, but many will walk away with "planted" opinions of both candidates.

Is this objective reporting, or bias? Please remove the halo and admit the media is biased, and always has been. Unfortunately, it is not a balanced bias as in the past, but predominantly to the left. Did the someone hit a nerve?

Bob Van Slobig

Naperville