The Times does a good job of selecting opposing opinions presented by local non-professional writers on the Opinion page. The professional journalists dealing specifically with Georgia politics are also generally objective and do a good job of representing opposing factions.
The selection of professional journalists dealing with national politics, such as Ann McFeatters, Kathleen Parker, Dick Meyer and even Jonah Goldberg, who have more power to sway public opinion, however seem to have a white hot antipathy toward Donald Trump based primarily on invalidated charges of sexual misconduct or seemingly adolescent behavior, with comparatively little to say about Hillary Clinton
A current major issue, belabored endlessly, charges that he groped 11 women during the same time period 10 or 11 years ago, yet they are just now coming forward prior to the election with such charges, which is to say the least, ridiculous. Since there are already validated charges of unethical misconduct by the Clinton campaign, it may be more logical to assume that same group managed to resurrect these poor “mistreated women” from a somewhat questionable base.
Even if there are, or were, some basis to their inane rhetoric, how can you unfavorably compare Trump’s actions and morals to Hillary Clinton’s “deplorable” standards? Trump’s unacceptable actions are based primarily on invalidated sexual charges and brash seemingly adolescent rhetoric. Clinton, in contrast, is a proven chronic liar even under oath, and whose actions has resulted in death of government officials, and has compromised national security in her quest for power and riches.
Doesn’t it make you wonder, at this critical time, why these and other major media writers never mention the fact that the Clintons stole $200,000 worth of furniture from the White House at the end of Bill’s term?
Their explanation, as justification, that they were penniless is beyond belief. Would anyone but the Clintons have managed to keep out of jail for such an endeavor? This act was a classic expression of their moral character, which frankly makes either of them unfit for any government position, especially one in which national security is a primary responsibility.
There are professional journalists who realize the gravity of allowing an immoral criminal to fill the office of president of this country. I suggest the editorial staff make an effort to legitimize objectivity by selecting or enticing such a journalist to “level the playing field.”
Monte E. Seehorn