So, NY Times publishes article on Benghazi that wants to downplay or entirely debunk attack as result of a planned terrorist initiative and play up once again the whole notion the violence was a spontaneous reaction to some ludicrously inept putatively anti-Muslim video by some marginal wacko that had actually gone up on the web a few months before the aggrieved believers decided to defend their beliefs by screaming some curses, setting some fires and dragging some American corpses through the streets - and I guess what this means is that the dogged efforts of the left wing media to get Hillary elected president have officially kicked in regardless of any truths or realities that might negatively impact perceptions of whether she deserves the job or has what it takes to do it well or indeed, given her ideological predispositions, is at all a good fit for what the country needs at the moment. Nope, none of that matters - it made sense to these people in 2008 to make a black guy president of the most powerful country in the world simply because he was black and in 2016 it will make equal sense to them to make a woman president simply because she's a woman [well, a woman and fiercely liberal of course - just as in 2008 it wouldn't have sufficed for these people that Condi Rice become the first black president, so too in 2016 it will not at all do that the first female president is Nikki Haley or some such conservative abomination against the progressive light].
I consider this kind of media bias to be an existential threat to conservatism in America and is the reason why I see it as vital that the 2016 GOP nominee have the personality and other wherewithals to overcome or at least counteract this bias, which necessarily means also has the ability to inspire broad appeal - the dynamics behind the notion of 'Reagan democrats' needs to reemerge if the GOP is to survive as a national party. As well, if Hillary is indeed the nominee and the top of the conservative ticket isn't a woman, then the running mate must be a woman - if the nominee is Christie I wouldn't even bother vetting a man - just take the top five female prospects out there and choose the one who impresses most.
I consider this kind of media bias to be an existential threat to conservatism in America and is the reason why I see it as vital that the 2016 GOP nominee have the personality and other wherewithals to overcome or at least counteract this bias, which necessarily means also has the ability to inspire broad appeal - the dynamics behind the notion of 'Reagan democrats' needs to reemerge if the GOP is to survive as a national party. As well, if Hillary is indeed the nominee and the top of the conservative ticket isn't a woman, then the running mate must be a woman - if the nominee is Christie I wouldn't even bother vetting a man - just take the top five female prospects out there and choose the one who impresses most.