[lukev]

By "clinton obsession" do you mean the coverage of her email "scandal" more than any other political topic combined? Yeah, that was absolutely a media failure.

But the answer is to hold media accountable, not to throw truth under a bus and promulgate nonsense with the excuse of "the other tribe is just as bad!"

This behavior exactly matches something described by Sartre in the last century. Replace "anti-semite" with "Trump supporter" in the following passage and it is strikingly on point:

Never believe that anti-Semites are completely unaware of the absurdity of their replies. They know that their remarks are frivolous, open to challenge. But they are amusing themselves, for it is their adversary who is obliged to use words responsibly, since he believes in words. The anti-Semites have the right to play. They even like to play with discourse for, by giving ridiculous reasons, they discredit the seriousness of their interlocutors. They delight in acting in bad faith, since they seek not to persuade by sound argument but to intimidate and disconcert. If you press them too closely, they will abruptly fall silent, loftily indicating by some phrase that the time for argument is past. It is not that they are afraid of being convinced. They fear only to appear ridiculous or to prejudice by their embarrassment their hope of winning over some third person to their side.

- Sartre, "Anti-semite and Jew", 1944

[emblem21]

CNN collusion with Clinton?

Rolling Stone's fake rape story to double down on the feminist (and thus pro-Clinton) narrative?

Complete MSM involvement to sell the war in Iraq?

As far as I'm concerned, as long as MSM acts as the executive branch's lap dog, it should be considered an official wing of the government and should qualify for constitutional regulation just like the other branches.