Media & The "News"

One has to wonder at the intentions of the media when a headline such as this appears:

“New senator helps Democrats advance jobs bill”

Such a headline floated across cyberspace from Reuters yesterday evening.

To this Main Streeter, it is just another example of how media try to manipulate the actual truth.

What is true is that Scott Brown, the newly elected Republican Senator from MA, did vote for the jobs bill, proposed and backed, in the main, by Democrats.

What is missing from the headline, one designed to make Senator Brown appear as though he is the lone Republican, is that there were five from the right side who voted for the bill.

Also absent from the headline, there were a couple from the left who voted against the bill.

In the first paragraph of the story it states that Brown “bucked his party.” (Let us create a bit of controversy here!)

The article, let alone the first paragraph, does not name the other four Republicans who also “bucked” their party, nor even of the two Dems who, conversely, “bucked” theirs by voting against it.

Why would it be that way?

This example of “news reporting” is an example of sensationalism, media bias, and media trying even harder to push the divide.

All of Main Street USA knows that for major pieces of legislation (in every administration) there is a divide, left vs right. What is not needed by anyone is media sensationalism to try and create a bigger gap.

Maybe Reuters could issue a story showing, for each and every piece of legislation introduced during the past year, how the individual Senators voted so America can see how many of them “buck” their party, based on who introduced the bill in the first place.

Over For Now.

Main Street One

What Is A Special Interest Group?

Special Interest Groups (SIGs) may be good or may be bad.

That, of course, would depend upon a particular SIG promoting what you believe in and support, or (more coarsely) your agenda—or not.

According to Wikipedia: “An interest group (also advocacy group, lobby group, pressure group or special interest group) is an organization that seeks to influence political decisions.”

And from Brittanica Concise Encyclopedia: “Any association of individuals or organizations, usually formally organized, that, on the basis of one or more shared concerns, attempts to influence public policy in its favour.”

The question, then, is this:

Are not both branches of Congress Special Interest Groups?

Did not Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, on Dec 19, 2009, admit to such things as: “You will find a number of states are treated differently than other states. That’s what legislation is all about. It’s compromise.”

To be clear, Reid, in closed sessions, offered Senators from a few states (who were not going to vote for the Senate’s version of healthcare reform) additional benefits, tacked on to the already massive bill, in order to secure their votes and reach that high and mighty number 60.

Would the actions of Senator Reid not qualify as “special interest?”

Would not the billions and billions of dollars of earmarks added on to various pieces of legislation that have passed through Congress and the White House (from both parties) be considered as the work of a SIG, or even a group of SIGs working together?

Granted, certain (probably many) pieces of pork may have been the work of an outside SIG (i.e., association SIG, labor union SIG, business SIG, etc.) over the years, but the work done on Capitol Hill with healthcare reform, was really the work of the Congressional SIG.

Thus, when politicians (or anyone for that matter) complain about SIGs and the influence they may wield upon the political and legislative process, and how it may threaten our Freedom and Liberty, it seems that Main Street USA only has to look (if that were literally possible) at what goes on “behind closed doors” to find the truth.

Food For Thought.

Over For Now.

Main Street One