Reporter Admits Media Bias in Prop 8 Gay Judge Ruling

Sean Hannity has continually called 2008 “the year journalism died” for the extraordinary efforts key members of the media took to cover up scandal after scandal that came to light from President Obama’s election campaign.  It became increasingly clear that these media personalities and outlets that portrayed themselves and moderate and neutral had no other goal than acting as propaganda extensions to the Obama election campaign.  The myth of the objective reporter (if it ever did exist) is increasingly crumbling as the news networks — Fox, MSNBC, CNN — news wires — AP, Reuters — and of course news magazines and papers — Time, Newsweek, Wall Street Journal, New York Times, Washington Post — are more and more openly staking their ideological positions in the sand.

In this video, one reporter (who admits her own bias that she is happy about the ruling to legalize gay marriages in California) expresses her concern over media suppression of certain key facts in the case including Judge Vaughn Walker’s homosexual orientation and the gay activist rulings he has previously made.  Media outlets that do briefly mention his sexual orientation say that it is utterly irrelevant.  Who are they kidding?  If the judge had been Mormon and ruled to uphold the voter’s definition of marriage would they call that irrelevant?  We all know the answer to that.

If it was not clear to anyone before it should be now: Never assume a news organization is telling you the whole truth about a story.  Never assume they are only presenting you with the facts and leaving it up to you to decide.  You choose your own and try to choose your children’s friends because of the enormous influence they will have over who you or your child will turn into.  Do the same with the news organizations you pull your news from.  They will shape your values and character, whether you like it or not.



Filed under Gay Marriage, Homosexuality, Media Bias, Parental Rights

2 responses to “Reporter Admits Media Bias in Prop 8 Gay Judge Ruling

  1. Rachel Rodriguez

    So when the California Supreme court upheld Prop. 8., we should have inquired about their sexuality? Since we know a majority of them to be hetrosexual, can we also assume that they have a bias? Why was that not news, since you are arguing that we need to know the sexual orientation of judges who rule on this issue? Or is the argument that straight people can rule on gay issues without a bias but gays cannot? Would this be akin to someone making the arguement, say in the 1960s, that blacks could not rule on civil right cases because they obviosuly would have a bias but whites would have no such bias?

    • The majority of the justices on the CA supreme court do hold a bias. Remember, they’re the ones who overthrew the vote of the people in the first place and neutered marriage. They were certainly activists who felt they knew better than the people of California, but even they would not do what Judge Walker did. Even the American Civil Liberties Union and the 9th Federal Circuit Court criticized him for his monkey court. This is far beyond Judge Walker’s sexuality. This is about him allowing his personal agenda to overtake his duty to uphold the constitution, democracy and rule of law. I cannot imagine that opponents of Prop 8 (if they knew what they were talking about) can be happy about this decision. You are not changing anyone’s mind or winning over any public support. Quite the contrary, Judge Walker has just upset a new group of libertarians and independents who are sympathetic to gay rights but don’t like seeing their vote canceled out by one powerful man.

      Gay “rights” aside, this decision is a terrible precedent that cannot be left to stand. One judge rules that DOMA is unconstitutional because the federal government has no right to define marriage, and another rules that Prop 8 is unconstitutional because the constitution doesn’t allow states to deny the right to marriage to anyone who wants it. Well which one is it? Have any of these people actually read the constitution?!! None of this crap is in there. The constitution (+ amendments) does not mention marriage at all. It reserves all rights not specifically mentioned in the document to the states. These judges are making crap up to further their own personal agendas, the will of the people be damned! That is judicial tyranny. One powerful man cancels out the votes of millions of citizens because he doesn’t like what they voted for. That is tyranny. You cannot describe it any other way. Are we a democracy or are we ruled by all-powerful judges?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s