Be Fair To Both Sides - And Response (2)

I expect politician to say untruths, both Democrats and Republicans. But what I hate, but now have to also expect, is news organizations to lie and be very biased. Young people today have never had honest reporting, putting aside their person political opinions, from any of the major news media. I have not found any outlet, (TV, newspaper, etc.) that is neutrally presented. While FOX News is right wing, every other major outlet is left wing, along with the source organization AP. A pox on both their houses.

Since this was on ABC, examples of the bias from the “debate” are all one direction, but I will give a few examples about both sides by “so called” moderators.:

Fracking: Harris said in 2020 that Joe Biden would not ban fracking. She never said she would not. They have tried to find anytime she said she would not, but all they have found is that Biden would not. And she has never had authority to ban fracking as VP. VP does not have that power. What Harris has said is she would ban fracking in 2019 and before. She actually sued the Obama/Biden administration as California AG to stop fracking. No explanation of why she said she would ban fracking then and why now she falsely says she now says she will not. No instant fact checking by biased “so called” moderators.

IVF: Harris tries to put IVF in with abortion. IVF is not abortion and the only thing that is about is a single judge in Alabama saying that the Alabama law was poorly written such that it could be banning IVF along with abortion. That was corrected very quickly. And immediately when it happened, Trump said it had to be fixed, as it was. But when Harris falsely said Trump would ban IVF: No instant fact checking by biased “so called” moderators.

Killing babies after birth: More biased instant fact checking by “so called” moderators. This was only about babies that survive a failed abortion. The Democrat former governor of Virginia stated the procedure when a baby was born in a failed abortion was to set the baby aside to let the mother “decide” whether to save the baby or let it die, by doing nothing to help it. That has been confirmed by undercover investigation in Minnesota where the abortion provider said that the procedure was to only give the baby “comfort care”, and nothing to help it survive. There have been multiple nurses that have quit working at abortion clinics because of that and have publically said so. The biased “so called” moderator was correct in that there is no law allowing murder of babies after birth, but what she will not say is that abortion providers “allowing” abortion survivors to die by doing nothing to help them, such as clearing the airway, etc., has never been prosecuted, even though technically that could be argued it is negligent homicide by a licensed doctor.

January 6^th riot: The “so called” moderators intentionally mislead in saying that Trump told the people to, in essence, attack the capitol. Why don’t they actually just show or state what he actually said - to peacefully protest. They always seem to edit to present disinformation/misinformation by leaving out the full quotes. That is bias.

Springfield, Ohio: Trump repeated something that has not been confirmed, but was stated by an individual. The mayor of the town said it is not confirmed and believed to be from another town. While the biased “so called” moderators were correct in stating what the mayor said, the way it was done (all instant fact checking against Trump, ignored false statements by Harris) proved once again the bias.

Trade deficit: Harris falsely stated that the Trump administration had the highest trade deficit in history. The trade deficit during the Biden/Harris administration has exceeded any from Trump. No instant fact checking by biased “so called” moderators.

Project 2025: It was not created or used at all by Trump or his campaign, but Harris continually says it is his. No instant fact checking by biased “so called” moderators.

Gun confiscation: Harris has called for a mandatory “buy back” of certain guns multiple times. Never changed that position until this election cycle. No instant fact checking by biased “so called” moderators.

Ukraine invasion: Trump did falsely state that Harris “negotiated” with Putin and Zelensky. She did not. That was instantly fact checked by biased “so called” moderators, but this was said by Trump immediately after Harris stated she had been to Ukraine and Poland a couple of days before the invasion. But she also falsely stated before that “I have never been to Europe” in talking about not ever going to the Southern border. No mention of that direct conflict in her statements by the biased “so called” moderators.

National abortion ban: Harris stated Trump would sign (Congress passes, not the president) a national abortion ban. This one that both sides of the abortion argument are misleading about. As the Supreme Court has stated in the Roe decision, it is not a federal issue. If one would be tried to be put in, it has the same problem as the original Roe decision. It is not a federal issue allowed by the Constitution. Read the simple 10th Amendment and then try to find anywhere the federal government is given that authority. Trump was completely correct in saying that is up to the states (as designed in the Constitution), so that people with different opinion can decide in each state.

There are other examples of ABC media bias, but no media from either side will tell in neutrally. Anyone that does not listen to both sides before deciding on any of the political issues is not really informed and probably does not care about honest government.

This national division and hatred is the natural result from the Democrat/Republican joint corruption. Why have we allowed them to put laws in place to only have putting those political parties as the only viable options. Why are independents or so called minor parties excluded by law from participation in the federal government, Federal Election Commission, National Labor Relation Board, etc.

This corruption of government instead treating all citizens equally will continue to breed hatred and division. “Us or Them” is not the same as “good or bad” but that is what each side presents, just changing which side is which.

As George Washington said, “Permanent political parties will be the death of the republic.” We are seeing that death approaching with the political parties aiding in the destruction of honest government by media dedicated to biased reporting - on both sides.

The “two party system” is not in the Constitution, but that has been taught in schools to indoctrinate the “useful innocents”.

Jim Hill

* * *

I want to commend Mr. Hill for his statement “Anyone that does not listen to both sides before deciding on any of the political issues is not really informed and probably does not care about honest government.”

Too many people on this forum have made clear that he or she definitively refuses to listen to what is said by the other side. Of those, he or she only listens to his or her preferred media; the remaining media are heretics. When rebuttals to his or her arguments are factually correct, those people close their minds even more.

There are some paragraphs where Mr. Hill tried “to be fair to both sides.” For others, he wasn’t.

Had Mr. Hill been pleased with the outcome of the debate, he likely would not have been critical.

Fact check or no fact check, the root cause of Mr. Hill’s debate angst is likely the constant lying, constant shifting to immigration, and evading the questions asked, as well as the arrogance and pomposity of his candidate. Similarly to Fox, since Mr. Hill can’t say anything positive about the Republican candidate’s performance, he blames his candidate’s failures on the messenger, ABC.

Here are just a few of his candidate’s constant lies:

“Eating cats and dogs.” “The Country is going to hell.” “We have millions of people pouring into our country from prisons and jails, from mental institutions and insane asylums.” “ I rebuilt our entire military.” (Washington Post fact checker, 9/11/2024)

“She wants to confiscate your guns.” “She has a plan to confiscate everybody's gun”. “We have inflation like very few people have ever seen before. Probably the worst in our nation's history.” (inflation is 2.9 percent as shown on CNBC.com) “I went to the Wharton School of Finance and many of those professors, the top professors, think my plan is a brilliant plan, it's a great plan. (after a diligent search, I found no professors at Wharton who think his plan is brilliant)

Here are few examples where Mr. Hill falls short of trying “to be fair to both sides”:

“The “so called” moderators intentionally mislead in saying that Trump told the people to, in essence, attack the capitol.”

In multiple paragraphs, Mr. Hill stated the moderators were “biased” and “misleading”. Mr. Hill, too, is being misleading and biased. The then President closed his speech at the Ellipse at 1:10 p.m. by encouraging “We fight. We fight like hell and if you don't fight like hell, you're not going to have a country anymore. So let's walk down Pennsylvania Avenue." Mr. Hill, since when have the words “fight like hell” been instructions for “peacefully”? By then, the “peacefully” was probably forgotten by the insurrectionists.

“Harris has called for a mandatory “buy back” of certain guns multiple times. Never changed that position until this election cycle.” Is it “fair to both sides by omitting that in 2019 then Senator Harris supported a mandatory buy back of only assault weapons? He is wrongly leading the reader to infer that the buy back was for all guns, not just assault weapons.

Is it “fair to both sides” that Mr. Hill uses the word “certain” and does not define “certain” to mean only assault weapons?

As I stated above, is it “fair to both sides” that when the Republican candidate said “She wants to confiscate your guns” and “ She has a plan to confiscate everybody's gun”, while omitting her response of “We're not taking anybody's guns away. So stop with the continuous lying about this stuff.” Is it “fair to both sides” to omit that politicians regularly change positions. For example, a few years ago (or less) J. D. Vance had nothing positive to say about the Republican candidate. Now, everything Vance says is positive.

Mr. Hill is merely inserting his political opinion with the buy back statement, and is not intending “to be fair to both sides.” His opinions subtly speak out where he disregards “to be fair to both sides.”

I’m not a lawyer though, and I’m assuming Mr. Hill is not either. I disagree with Mr. Hill’s thesis regarding abortion and the 10th Amendment. The 10th Amendment reads “"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people".

There are tens of thousands of Federal laws and regulations in force today where “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States” have been enacted at the Federal level.

Immigration, pollution, drugs, product safety, education are among those “powers not delegated . . “ by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States.” But each issue is regulated by Federal laws and regulations via Article I, Section 8, Clause 1. This clause gives Congress the power to "provide for the general welfare of the United States." While SCOTUS has ruled for States Rights about abortion, should either Party enact a ban on or a law allowing abortion, the general welfare clause could be a basis for such a law.

I also disagree that schools teach the two party system to indoctrinate the “useful innocents.”

The two party system is the predominant method today by which candidates are chosen and run for office. There have been numerous attempts to create a third party: The Bull Moose Party, The Libertarian Party, The Green Party, The Prohibition Party and the Dixiecrats of the South. The two party system, and the emergence and failures of third parties, should be taught since that is the political reality and the political history.

I’ll end my letter by again commending Mr. Hill, this time for stating “This corruption of government instead treating all citizens equally will continue to breed hatred and division. “Us or Them” is not the same as “good or bad” but that is what each side presents, just changing which side is which.

Joe Warren

* * *