MSM Bias and Mayor Daley's Lousy Approval Rating

...but will the MainStream Media and the Democrats mock Chicago's Mayor Daley for HIS all-time low approval rating of 35 percent? Don't hold your breath. This post is more about widespread liberal media bias than it is about Mayor Daley's horrible approval ratings. The hypocrisy is stunning, as demonstrated by the Chicago Tribune in a Sept. 13 article by Dan Mihalopoulos: For the first time since he became mayor two decades ago, Daley's critics outnumber his fans, a Tribune/WGN poll found. The mayor's approval rating is at an all-time low of 35 percent in Tribune polls, according to the new survey. Mihalopoulos reveals a certain bias with his fourth paragraph (emphasis added): None of this is to suggest that Daley is losing his dominance of the City Council or his luster with the city's business elite. There is no serious challenger on the horizon if Daley, who regularly wins re-election by landslide, chooses to run for a seventh term in 2011. Even more than his legendary father, the 67-year-old Daley is the only game in town. Why does Mihalopoulos feel a need to apologize for his report of Daley's miserable approval rating of 35 percent? From mid-2006 to early 2008, President Bush hovered at or near a 35 percent approval rating. When The Chicago Tribune - or any of the other MSM - reported Bush's low ratings, did any of them quickly qualify those reports with phrases such as "None of this is to suggest that Bush is losing his dominance of the US Congress?" They did not, and yet that was essentially the case. Even after losing the Congress to the Pelosi Gang in 2006, Bush continued to have his way with the Iraq War and other issues. Although not quite the rubber stamp that is the Chicago City Council, the US Congress was more compliant than most average Democrat voters had hoped it would be after they won it two years into Bush's second term. When the MSM reported on Bush's low approval ratings, did they feel it necessary to also note that Bush won "re-election by [a] landslide?" They did not, of course, even though Bush handily defeated the John "Frenchy" Kerry and John "The Adulterer" Edwards in 2004. The MainStream Media have yet to catch up to the ACORN-Prostitution sting of last week. The MSM virtually buried the story of Obama being forced to dismiss Van Jones. Yesterday's March on Washington, a gargantuan Tea Party, is estimated by the US Parks Service and the D.C. police at over 1.5 Million people, yet most of the MSM has either ignored it or downplayed it as "tens of thousands." MSNBC admitted to "hundreds of thousands" of people, but oddly said that police estimated "tens of thousands." MSNBC, one of the MSM, just couldn't bring itself to honestly relate the much larger, actual, official estimates. The MSM, which we on the Right have accused of bias for decades, has bent over backwards in the past weeks to prove just how correct we have been. They've done it unintentionally, of course, just as a drunk who fails a breathalyzer test unintentionally proves himself guilty of having a few too many drinks. They cannot help it. It is they way they behave. Hold on, here's another metaphor: Like a duck, if it quacks like one and walks like one, it is one. The MSM has been quacking very loudly of late. RELATED: Up to two million march to US Capitol to protest against Obama's spending in ‘tea-party’ demonstration - Daily Mail (UK) ABC Denies It Ever Said Yesterday's Protest Rally Had 1 Million People Two Million Man March Size Matters; So Do Lies The 9/12 March on Washington (Wizbang) Media Bias Is Real, Finds UCLA Political Scientist / UCLA Newsroom Media Bias Of The Day Black & Right Your Friendly Media Bias Reminder - Mark Hemingway PROOF: SADDAM HAD URANIUM AFP: Iraqi uranium transferred to Canada Cool Hats & Shirts for Cool Conservatives Leave a Comment... Chicago News Bench RSS Feed We're on Twitter...