Post-Star: Republican Tool or Fascist Propaganda Machine?

Some of the recent letters to the editor in the Post-Star speak angrily of "liberal bias". They talk about it with the simplistic idiocy of a Rush Windbag or a Bill O'Really. I would imagine these letters are written by those who can barely read. These occasional media buffs seem to think that Will Doolittle's occasional rant against John Sweeney and his drunken frat-boy behavior must constitute some kind of widespread bias against him and other faux-conservative types by our area's daily newspaper.The truth about the Post-Star's actual leanings is a lot more telling than that. I have often felt that the Post-Star staff write those "Stop Attacking My Little Weeney, You Liberal Rag" letters themselves so that they can talk about how embattled they are and how fierce their conservative critics are. My latest archive search seems to back that up, 100%.Trying to find out how well the Post-Star is doing at covering all of the candidates running for state office, I searched their archives looking for any evidence that they have even mentioned third party candidates or independents. Being a Green, I happen to know which members of my party are running for these particular offices. I apologize to those from other real parties for not properly representing the other independent and third party candidates. Like Will Rogers said, "I only know what I read in the paper." Too bad that OUR paper doesn't cover those who wish to represent the working class and the truth!In the Governor's race (which seems to be shaping up to be no race at all), the Post Star has not done much previewing of potential candidates. Interestingly, Malachy McCourt who is running for Governor as a Green and who announced almost two months ago, has not even been mentioned once by the Fascist Daily. The ComPost-Star has yet to report this information to anyone, anywhere (not even on page 5 with no pictures). Boy, they must REALLY hate democracy or Irish people or authors or Greens! In the Senate races, Hillary Clinton weighs in with 70 stories while her Green opponent, Howie Hawkins, gets ... NONE. "Little Chuckie" Schumer gets 221 stories under his belt while Green Publisher/Entrepeneur Sander Hicks gets ... NONE.In the LOCAL Congressional race, John "Pro-War" Weeney gets 222 stories. Kirsten "Fake Democrat" Gillibrand gets 113. Her anti-war Democratic Party opponents are hardly mentioned (Morris Guller, Doug Walters et al). When they are, it is often as an afterthought and rarely, if ever, is the lead point of the story. This presupposes, to the reader, that these candidates don't really stand a chance.Wouldn't it be great if the media was forced to do what is right and equally cover ALL candidates? Why should they be able to only cover the war-party and pro-corporate candidates (Democrat and Republican)? Where is there any journalistic ethic in the skewed, biased, narrow, selective, fascist reporting that this archive search represents?In a time when walls are literally being built around our country to keep our slaves in and allow for even more terrible abuses of power by our domestic, corporate, political machines, we MUST demand that media try to tell us the truth. Maybe they could have a special weekly column called, "The Truth (Just this Once)". They could run it every Tuesday hidden in the classified section or on a back page. Hardly anyone would ever notice, I'm sure. How much harm could it really do? The New York Times has been telling the truth with just about that frequency and look where its gotten them! We're all still well on the road to militant corporatism and they are still considered by many of those directly affected to be a "real" newspaper. Truly frightening!