More evidence of Liberal Media Bias....

Please take note of the US Weekly covers above. What do you notice? How is US Weekly framing the issue? Which headline and picture is flattering, which one is not? I find it interesting that in the Barack Obama cover, there is no mention of the controversy revolving around Rezko fund raising scandal. Now Obama will say that there was no way he knew that $10,000 in funds came from Rezko, whom is now going on trial for donating money to Obama's campaign for his 2004 Senatorial Seat that is linked to corruption, as well as reimbersing money to an individual that gave money to Obama's campaign as well. That may have violated Federal Election Laws. The trial takes place on 2/25/09. Obama, to be fair, is not accused of any wrong doing, but, his name does come up in the court documents and evidence against Tony Rezko. Further, Obama, if he truly did nothing wrong, is correctly distancing himself from this whole controversy. However, you would not know that anything was going on based on the cover that US Weekly put out. The cover is quite favorable.

Now, look at the cover of Sarah Palin. Notice anything different about the headline? Wow, lies, scandals and babies. Holy crap, her daughter is pregnant out of wedlock (currently), she's accused of lies and scandals. Gives a pretty negative image of her doesn't it? However, it is clear that US Weekly handled these two political individuals differently. No mention of controversy with Obama, yet, all kinds of shady things going on with Sarah Palin.

Can you guess who US Weekly is rooting for this fall? One other question. Why is it that Sarah Palin is taking so much abuse from the media and others, and no one calls that poor taste given that she is a woman? Where is the National Organization of Women (NOW) on this issue? It should not matter her politics, she is a woman who has worked very hard, raised a family, was a mayor and governor and is now nominated for the second highest office in the U.S. I believe, only the second woman to be nominated (the first would have been Geraldine Ferraro) to Vice President. The media and others beat up on her, and NOW says nothing?! Apparently, they only stand up to protect women depending on their political persuasion. Many complain that "oh, well Hillary was mistrated too". I would agree she was not respected in her campaign for the Democratic Nomination. However, she was not attacked anywhere near to the extent that Sarah Palin is being attacked now. They are going after Sarah's family. Anybody remember that happening to Hillary? I don't. Not in her campaign for the Democratic Nomination that is.

So, if you agree that US Weekly is clearly showing a bias here, as I do, I will leave the address where you can contact Janice Min (a successful woman herself mind you, whom I would think would respect another succesfful woman, but apparently only if she is of the correct political persuasion), the Editor in Chief of US Weekly Magazine. Feel free to write her and let her know how you feel. If you support their bias, or if you're against it. But, you must keep an open mind separate from Sarah Palin's political thoughts. She is a successful woman that raised a family and is nominated to a very prestigious office. Period. Does she deserve this abuse and these attacks? I don't believe so, I believe that US Weekly owes her an apology and I have already sent my letter to Janice Min decreeing that. You can do as you choose.

Janice Min

Editor In Chief

US Weekly

P.O. Box 8253

Red Oak, IA

51591-1253