Debate questioners show media’s bias

I wonder how many American watching the recent Republican debate questioned why Diane Sawyer and George Stephanopoulos spent a disproportionate amount of time questioning the candidates on two subjects — contraception and same-sex marriage? I found myself wondering what my impressions might have been had I been a traveler from another country, unfamiliar with the political and economic conditions of our nation, and had decided to “tune into ABC”? Would the directions of the questioning have led me to believe contraception and same-sex marriage were of major interest to a majority of the electorate? Would I have noticed that even the candidates appeared to be initially baffled?

It was obvious that they were intended to turn the Republican political debate into a rendition of “Diane and George’s favorite hot-button, social issues.”

If there’s anyone in the news media who still maintains that no built-in journalistic bias exists within the liberal national media, they’ve never crossed any of the many political, economic or social intersections where members of the liberal media come face to face with recognizable people of faith or a very popular or emerging political candidate.

It became almost painfully and pathetically transparent how the efforts of Diane and George had taken a toll on potential benefits of this debate, when Jon Huntsman, fortunately for the viewing audience and candidates, simply said he was “the father of seven children.” It brought the house down! So much for “contraception” and “same sex marriage.” This allowed Diane and George, to chuckle pleasantly at Huntsman’s self-effacing comment and ease up on the message peddle for the evening. And, why not? They had, after all, succeeded — however heavy-handed it was — in making their points throughout this debate. The losers, of course, were the viewers and candidates.

P.J. Dalton

Northbrook