The mainstream media have gone over the line and are now straight-out propagandists for the Obama campaign.

While they have been liberal and blinkered in their worldview for decades, in 2007-08, for the first time, the major media consciously are covering for one candidate for president and consciously are knifing the other. This is no longer journalism; it is simply propaganda. (The American left-wing version of the Völkischer Beobachter cannot be far behind.)

And as a result, we are less than seven weeks away from possibly electing a president who has not been thoroughly or even halfway honestly presented to the country by our watchdogs — the press. The image of Obama that the press has presented to the public is not a fair approximation of the real man. They consciously have ignored whole years of his life and have shown a lack of curiosity about such gaps, which bespeaks a lack of journalistic instinct.

Sir Nexus is very thankful that we no longer have to rely on the old dinosaur news sources such as ABC, NBC, CNN, The New York Times, etc. who don't give us the complete story and treat us like idiots. It's no wonder that these outdated left-wing pr factories are losing buckets of money and also the last remnants of their credibility while alternative news sources continue to grow. Hey, there's a reason why Fox News dominates the ratings...

The bias is now worse than ever. It is absolutely dispicable how the public is being deceived about Obama. There is so much about Obama that is not being reported by the establishment media....Blankley went on to write...

Thus, the public image of Obama is of a "man who never was."

The mainstream media ruthlessly and endlessly repeat any McCain gaffes while ignoring Obama gaffes. You have to go to weird little Web sites to see all the stammering and stuttering that Obama needs before getting out a sentence fragment or two. But all you see on the networks is an eventually clear sentence from Obama. You don't see Obama's ludicrous gaffe that Iran is a tiny country and no threat to us. Nor his 57 American states gaffe. Nor his forgetting, if he ever knew, that Russia has a veto in the U.N. Nor his whining and puerile "come on" when he is being challenged. This is the kind of editing one would expect from Goebbels' disciples, not Cronkite's.

Nor have the media paid any serious attention to Obama's rise in Chicago politics. How did honest Obama rise in the famously sordid Chicago political machine with the full support of Boss Daley? Despite the great — and unflattering — details on Obama's Chicago years presented in David Freddoso's new book on Obama, the mainstream media continue to ignore both the facts and the book. It took a British publication, The Economist, to give Freddoso's book a review with fair comment....

And he goes on later to say...

The public image of Obama as an idealistic, post-race, post-partisan, well-spoken and honest young man with the wisdom and courage befitting a great national leader is a confection spun by a willing conspiracy of Obama, his publicist (David Axelrod) and most of the senior editors, producers and reporters of the national media.

Perhaps that is why the National Journal's respected correspondent Stuart Taylor wrote, "The media can no longer be trusted to provide accurate and fair campaign reporting and analysis."

The good news is that there is an internet news source where you can get the truth on Barack Obama. Check out
www.wnd.com  Sir Nexus visits World Net Daily, well, daily.

My insert link button is not working right now, so here's a naked link to Blankley's column for you: http://www.creators.com/opinion/tony-blankley.html?columnsName=tbl

So what are your thoughts? Do you think the media is covering Barack Obama fairly? Do they treat McCain/Palin as fairly as they treat Obama? Do you think you know Obama well enough to vote for him?

Sir Nexus, and the rest of the blogoshpere, want to read your thoughts.