Sun-Sentinel Should Be Embarrassed by Clinton Endorsement

South Florida Sun-Sentinel’s endorsement of Hillary Clinton for president is the best recent example demonstrating the extraordinary liberal media bias that has become commonplace in our nation’s newspapers over the years. It is undoubtedly the main reason no sentient being under the age of 60 would be caught dead reading a newspaper and the reason most seniors subscribe to newspapers for the TV and movie guide, crossword puzzles, to use the newsprint to clean their windshields or to line the bottoms of their bird cages.

The top of the page summarily dismisses the leading Republican candidates with the phrase “Why we can’t endorse Trump, Rubio, Cruz or Kasich.” It says Trump isn’t serious enough, Rubio lacks the experience and work ethic, Cruz is “scary” and although Kasich is most qualified and polling likely to beat Hillary, because he can’t win the Republican nomination, don’t waste your vote on him. Although there are various other “facts” listed for the four, you would never know by reading this editorial that these are four extremely accomplished men, with backgrounds worthy of admiration in many respects.

The endorsement continues with a header “Clinton’s experience and steadiness makes her best choice for president.” But for the fact that the section has a gratuitous photo of Bernie Sanders, the editorial says “nothing” about him. You would never know that Sanders is giving Clinton a run for her money no one can apparently fathom (unless one considers how weak a candidate she is). However, not even the smartest bookies in Las Vegas could have predicted their intense rivalry, mainly because Sanders is not even a Democrat!

The endorsement says Clinton’s resume is impressive and indicates the time she has spent over the years in national politics. The reader can easily infer that Clinton is the Cal Ripken of politics, with an impressive attendance record, with basically no accomplishments that would qualify her for president. The next major point made is that Clinton “also has chosen not to totally distance herself from the record of Barack Obama.” What? Obviously the Sun-Sentinel writers feel they must walk a tightrope here, wanting us to know Clinton supports the failed Obama administration’s policies, but not too much!

It continues with her foreign policy record by describing her opinions and her “support” for certain issues. Wait a minute, wasn’t she Secretary of State? There’s no mention of her accomplishments, which is not too surprising because indeed there are none. Harry Reid, however, wants us to know that “nearly every foreign policy victory of President Obama’s second term has Secretary Clinton’s fingerprints on it.” That’s an interesting choice of words with the subliminal message that we should really think of this administration’s recent foreign policy in criminal terms. The word “nearly” is a head scratcher; there were no foreign policy victories, so why quibble over which ones Clinton handled?

The closer is priceless: “Clinton would not need training wheels if she were to become the Democratic nominee.” Well that’s nice. It probably means she kept the notes from Bill’s two successful runs for president to which she may refer during her own pathetic race for the presidency.