Not a "long shot" any more?

[Sematary]

In another post someone pointed out a story on CNN Politics about RP saying the real unemployment rate being 20%
No where in the story did it say "longshot" or something to that effect. So I looked around to see if that caveat was being removed from other stories. It is....

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/10/23/paul-calls-for-end-to-federal-student-loan-program/

http://www.therightperspective.org/2011/10/23/ron-paul-wins-gop-swing-state-straw-poll-in-landslide/

http://www.thestatecolumn.com/articles/sarah-palin-cheers-ron-pauls-criticism-of-obamas-foreign-policy-decisions/

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2011/10/23/paul_were_witnessing_the_failure_of_a_keynesian_ec onomic_model.html

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/ron-paul-tells-david-gregory-that-troops-will-never-leave-iraq-calls-drone-war-illegal/



Unfortunately, it isn't a clean sweep but notice the difference? The FOX news' and other conservative type stuff isn't saying it - the left leaning media is.
These ones DID use "longshot" or some other terminology. I like to send them emails chastising them for using that crap.

http://articles.latimes.com/2011/oct/21/news/la-pn-paul-making-move-20111020

http://communities.washingtontimes.com/neighborhood/stimulus/2011/oct/23/principled-consistency-ron-paul/

It's too bad I had to add the above to this list because it was a REALLY positive article

http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/ron-paul-spending-2m-on-tv-ads-that-criticize-romney-perry-and-cain-for-bailout-stances/2011/10/20/gIQA7Mcv0L_story.html

[Sematary]

I sent this letter (which I'll use for all of them that I see) to the writer of the latimes article.

I noticed in your article, http://articles.latimes.com/2011/oct/21/news/la-pn-paul-making-move-20111020 that you described Ron Paul as a "longshot". I object to the use of this terminology in articles because it is not objective and it leads the reader to a conclusion that they didn't make for themselves. I object to you using it in your piece and it is my goal to see the media STOP using such self fulfilling language in their reports on ALL candidates because of the reasons I just mentioned. As a responsible journalist, it is your job to report, not interpret. Nor is it your job to TELL the reader who and who is not a viable candidate in YOUR OPINION. I would appreciate it in the future if you would not make judgments for your readers if you are not doing an opinion piece.

[Sematary]

I encourage everyone here to contact the writers or the organizations and lodge a complaint if for no other reason than it needs to be done.

[Sematary]

So did any of you 117 or whatever people that looked at this thread send anything out? I'd love to hear about it.